Please don't take this video down. I'll be sharing it around, because it is something that more people desperately need to hear. Thank you so much for your work.

@SlimThrull

Жыл бұрын

As will I. This is exceptionally useful information.

@joey9562

Жыл бұрын

As will I! Brilliant analysis. Bravo 👏

@dansaber4427

Жыл бұрын

You can be LGBT and Christian 👨‍❤️‍👨

@d00dufd00dz

Жыл бұрын

@@dansaber4427 Totally agree, I would never argue against that. That's why cultural shift within Christian circles and reinvigoration of what it means to be Christian in the material world is crucial to progress.

@iwalkinzion

Жыл бұрын

Would St. John 10:1 be applicable here?

Odd how Christians pick on gays but ignore all other laws from Bible like Adultery,work on Saturday , Idolatry trinity etc etc

@Ex_christian

Ай бұрын

Disgusting, isn’t it?

@user-uo7fw5bo1o

20 күн бұрын

Christians need people to look down and hate on while calling it Christian love.

@Chomper750

16 күн бұрын

Work on Saturday? That does not compute. Gentiles are not under the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law was only given to the Israelites. The Sabbath command does not apply to Gentiles.

@MitzvosGolem1

16 күн бұрын

@@Chomper750 Shabbat is in Laws of Torah from Sinai. True it does not apply to gentiles. No does kosher and many other laws. No rabbis made up Sabbath on 7th day.. Mosaic laws ? The seven Noachide laws apply to gentiles. As per Torah Tanakh Talmud. So you pick and choose what laws you like or reject.. Your man God idol trinity human sacrifice calvary died to replace all the laws your church fathers claim.. Another bizarre theology. Then came Quran .. תודה רבה שלום Oy vey

@Chomper750

16 күн бұрын

@@MitzvosGolem1 The Sabbath was given to Jews at Sinai. The Bible never mentions anyone before this moment, following the Sabbath.

You're a solid human being. I'm glad I found your channel.

@Camille-Saint-Saens

26 күн бұрын

No he isn’t. Sexuality isn’t a choice. It’s not that difficult.

@mariancosmingavrila4206

20 күн бұрын

​@@Camille-Saint-Saens did you even watch the full video?

I would add one more reason why these beliefs still have a strong hold over people is a desire not to have to say "We were wrong." If people believe that their moral teachings are divinely revealed, immutable decrees for all time and all people, then saying they were wrong calls into question that whole system.

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

Agreed. It reminds me of how the Bible was used as a means to enslave black people. The Bible was also used to prove that the Earth was the center of the universe. Calling those prevailing theories of their time into question would render many to have to reexamine their faith and question tenets they held in high esteem. Not everyone can handle that type of rumbling to their faith.

@homosexualbiologicalmaleexit

4 ай бұрын

religion is wrong

@endswithme555

3 ай бұрын

I would also add that a faith that hasn’t been tested for its validity is a flimsy faith. So many of our Bible heroes stories are about facing the testing of their faith. Is God real? Can I trust what I believe He told me? What if He isn’t real? That is a necessary part of the journey. That uncertainty is what allows the God of the universe to prove (not because He has to) to the person He is who He is

@mdug7224

2 ай бұрын

​@endswithme555 Don't you mean gods depicted in religious texts: the transposing of a ruling elite or religious leadership's rational to support their methods? Markers, such as gaslighting, threat, fables with examples of outcomes for disobedience, reward for compliance and cover stories to assert credibility, are all there.

“It’s not bigoted because…” Reminds me of someone telling me he was not transphobic because he was “Not afraid of trans people, and phobia means fear.” 😒

@capitalizingcapitalist1202

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely. You seem to be mixing up the words repulsion with fear.

@Bobson_Dugnutt_Esq

Жыл бұрын

@@capitalizingcapitalist1202 phobia is fairly often used to describe an irrational aversion to something, so I would say that particular shoe still fits 🤷‍♂️

@genotriana3882

Жыл бұрын

Isn’t it more bigoted to tell someone they are a bigot simply for holding a Christian viewpoint on behavioral guidelines for members of their church? When Muslims tell me it is a sin to eat pork or drink alcohol in their culture, I don’t get upset and tell them to deny their faith. All organizations have rules that prohibit those unwilling to follow them.

@TechySeven

Жыл бұрын

@@genotriana3882 *//"Isn’t it more bigoted to tell someone they are a bigot simply for holding a Christian viewpoint on behavioral guidelines for members of their church?"//* Not if they Actually Are Bigoted for it, by virtue of them continually attempting to Force such ideals onto Society At-Large, onto the People, into Law, and into Education; utterly Outside of their own personal little congregation. *//"When Muslims tell me it is a sin to eat pork or drink alcohol in their culture, I don’t get upset and tell them to deny their faith."//* Muslims in the U.S. aren't Trying to Write, Enact, and Pass Legislation that would Limit, Stifle, or Prevent everyone else (of every Non-Muslim Worldview) from eating pork or drinking alcohol. So, blatantly false analogy, as we actively have Large Groups of Christians trying to do just such things to bring the Nation closer to a Theocratic Dictatorship.

@TechySeven

Жыл бұрын

@@capitalizingcapitalist1202 False. The notion of homophobia or transphobia refers not just to Literal Direct Fear of OTHER, External, Homosexuals and Trans individuals; but it Also refers to the person's Own Internalized Irrational FEAR of the possibilities that they IMAGINE as a result of such individuals (i.e. "What if find out that * *I* * Like Penis?!?" or "What if I start thinking that * *I* * am Mentally Feminine?!?", and other similar-such examples, etc). Just as someone with Arachnaphobia need not necessarily just Only be irrationally frightened by the Literal Sight of Spiders, but can even be by the mere Thought of them too. By these measures, most of them Right-Wing Evangelicals (who are Very Anti-LGBTQ+) are EXTREMELY Phobic.

Thank you Dan! 😭 God bless you!

So Awesomely Explained, Thank you, Dan!

Thank you, Dan. As a former evangelical pastor, now out and queer, this is very, very meaningful to hear spoken with such clarity, precision, and authority.

@Pyromaniac77777

Жыл бұрын

Out of curiosity, were you anti-homosexuality while you were a pastor?

@zoebirss9944

Жыл бұрын

@@Pyromaniac77777 I believed that sex between people of the same gender was always sinful, yes.

@kittanz3033

10 ай бұрын

You want God AND you also want your deviant desires satisfied. You can't have both. It's either your D**k or the Lord. Is God not worth the sacrifice?? Do not sleep at night comfortably thinking that your homosexual acts are embraced by God. Sorry, but you are deluded. The only authority is God and it is he who speaks with clarity and precision. Dan McClellan won't be there to save you from God's wrath should you choose to adopt him as "authority."

@zoebirss9944

8 ай бұрын

@TiMMY2PH0NE5 The second

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

@@zoebirss9944what made you finally accept that part of yourself and live that part of who you were while leaving your pastoral profession? Was it your own revelation? Study? Did you read anything that gave you an aha moment?

Any time someone says “the purpose of sex is procreation” I just automatically assume they don’t have a very pleasurable sex life and it makes me sad for them and the people they have sex with

@GustavoMaldonado42

19 күн бұрын

it might not be the onlt purpose but its the main one dont you think? though its a weak argument i must agree

@edmundsishange3608

17 күн бұрын

@paulomaldonado6934 hardly the main one, most people have sex primarily for pleasure

@GustavoMaldonado42

17 күн бұрын

@@edmundsishange3608 main i mean not as the most often. if it’s like that then you’re right. but main as in the most important. well if we don’t procreate humanity ends lol

@ufpride83

17 күн бұрын

@@GustavoMaldonado42 humanity is going to end at some point. Ending because we didn’t procreate is probably the least violent and horrific way for humanity to end

@GustavoMaldonado42

17 күн бұрын

@@ufpride83 do you want humanity to end?

I exclaimed a spontaneous, "Wow!" when he started down the path of, "Sex outside of marriage is wrong because there isn't the premeditation for creating offspring."

I will have to listen many many more times to your discourse on this subject it is very intelligent ! What more can I say !

Than you very, very much for this. I wish you, and KZread had been around 30 years ago.

"It's not a sin to be homosexual, it's a sin to engage in homosexual activity". Oh, so I'm ok just as long as I pretend to be someone else and deny my own feelings. Glad to hear it. That makes it so much better

@SuicideboysGrey59

7 ай бұрын

There’s those who would say turn to Jesus as he will create you a new being. I’m female and I’m with a woman, I’ve prayed time and time again. People just want me to “pray the gay away.”

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

⁠@@SuicideboysGrey59I’ve been praying for 30 years…it hasn’t gone anywhere. In fact it’s gotten stronger!! People who aren’t experiencing this but yet still want to legislate against it, preach against it or create videos or lead campaigns against it baffle me?

@strawberriesstar

Ай бұрын

I think it's, be romantic, not sexual typa thing

@user-uo7fw5bo1o

20 күн бұрын

​@@strawberriesstar That seems to be what it is in the Bible, innit; yet most Christians at least the conservative ones can't stand the very ideas of gay romance and lesbian romance either. They think everything that has to do with being LGBTQ+ is sinful, even the basic urges are because they're "thought crimes". 🙄

@truthseeker4286

17 күн бұрын

Yes, it does make it better. Your body is not your own.

Thank you for your service. :)

Nicely said. I have no problem with starting with dictionary definitions if the intent is to get everyone on the same page with an agreement on what a word means. But it shouldn’t be taken as some kind of unassailable authority. The Bible is like a Rorschach test. An individual’s interpretation of the Bible says more about that individual’s psychology than it does about the Bible, although the Bible is so vague and conflicting in spots that it lends itself easily to that. If the owner’s manual of my car, where as unclear and open to interpretation as the Bible, then Subaru would’ve been sued out of existence years ago.

This is SO good. Thank you.

Perfectly done!

I thought "Woe unto those who have children during the second coming" meant that since their will be so many calamities and power-abuse by humankind during the last days, humans would be exposed to painful natural earth elements, abuse of power by men, and would have to endure extremely hard outer-world stuff. Not that it would be wrong to have the kids, just that it would be hard to watch your kids suffer, it would be hard to have to take care of your children when it's hard to take care of your self, and all that jazz. I didn't think that had anything to do with Paul's assertion that singleness can be more holy than being married.

Would St. John 10:1 be applicable here?

This is one of your best videos yet!

Would you debate Robert Gagnon on this topic? We can't seem to find anybody willing to do so and haven't for years. Thoughts I'd ask you.

Thank you for this.

Succinct, to the point, clear. Exceptional pedagogy. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

@JudeMalachi

3 ай бұрын

Only if you delusional, lol.

Please keep up the great work Dan!

@Camille-Saint-Saens

26 күн бұрын

Please DONT.

@Jake-zc3fk

26 күн бұрын

@@Camille-Saint-Saens When someone tears down your house it’s traumatic, even if it’s a shack.

Yes, I read an article several years ago on the “ick” factor. I think that still exists. The ick factor plays into the aversion to same-sex sex, particularly between men.

@JudeMalachi

3 ай бұрын

The thing as people’s consciences become warped through habitual sin, our ability to discern how gross are sexual perversions goes away. If you don’t find it abhorrent, all that means is that you're not in a state of grace, and you’ve lost the ability to discern that natural order of things-which doesn’t mean as Dan believes according to nature, but according to the proper teleology of a thing.

@chameleonx9253

2 ай бұрын

​@@JudeMalachiSo I guess all of those giraffes, and ducks, and dolphins, and salamanders, and dogs, and hundreds of other species that engage in homosexual sex are also fallen from grace, right? So sad that all of these wild animals are going against the natural order.

Thank you.

Christians need to realize and understand that not everyone is obligated to believe in their holy book.

@gangstadrz9326

Жыл бұрын

The problem is non-believers end up becoming nihilists and marxists. The Holodomor must never happen a second time.

@christsdisciple3105

Жыл бұрын

I do realize and understand this. But, I also realize this means those who don't will receive the condemnation of Hell. So, I'm going to keep spreading the Gospel. Because of love.

@eurech

Жыл бұрын

@@christsdisciple3105 There is no love in that, its just delusion and indoctrination. We don't want that.

@christsdisciple3105

Жыл бұрын

@@eurech I'll agree with the indoctrination, as people should put in good doctrine, but delusion? We'll start with the fact that even secular scholars believe Jesus lived and was crucified. His followers also believed He was resurrected and ascended to heaven(as all of them were persecuted and most were killed and no one dies for a lie they know is a lie) add in the high improbability of a mass hallucination event such as what His followers claimed to have seen and Luke's account showing someone who is close up to the facts and tries to get even minor details correct... Paul's vision of Jesus as someone who would have no reason to have a hallucination of a person he had never met and thought said person was a heretic... and then the cosmological argument(all things with a beginning have something that began them, the universe and time both have beginnings, thus requiring a timeless, spaceless, immaterial being to start them, all of which applies to God)... but with all that lined up and more can be added... is it really all that delusional?

@kenrodriguez5570

Жыл бұрын

I think that's kind of what spreading the gospel is tho...

Well done, Dan.

Tell the truth Dan love you my brother King 👑🌹👑👑

Quick question: What do you expect us to do? I didn’t ask to be homosexual. I wish I wasn’t and there isn’t a way to change it. Edit: I don’t wish I wasn’t. This is the way God made me so go be useless somewhere else.

@kodirawr

22 күн бұрын

Their ideal solution would be for you to not only “convert” / abstain from sex / pretend to be heterosexual, but ALSO condemn other homosexuals. They’d have their cake and eat it, too. This is why gays shouldn’t waste their lives trying to appease Christians

@kodirawr

22 күн бұрын

And the next best solution would be for us to “keep it to ourselves” aka they want to regress back to when homosexuals lived on the fringes of society and everyone pretended like we didn’t exist.

@user-uo7fw5bo1o

20 күн бұрын

​@@kodirawr Exactly. And they look to Russia on how to enforce that.

@mikemathewson1825

17 күн бұрын

What would you expect someone to do if they were sexually attracted to your partner (if you were married)?

@kodirawr

16 күн бұрын

@@mikemathewson1825 See, my point exactly. You expect us to "control our lusts" aka live celibate lives and die alone. That's why we don't listen to you lol

Dr. Dan McClellan drinking game: take a shot every time he says, "Alright, let's see it."

@deviouskris3012

8 ай бұрын

“Data”. Some videos can get you absolutely shattered.

@AlexLee-tk3is

8 ай бұрын

@@deviouskris3012 RIP liver

Wow thank you for this video may god bless you ❤️

I adopted kids with my wife. Have we been sinning since we couldn’t have kids? 😏

@keith6706

Жыл бұрын

Indeed. It would also mean that a man or woman who suffered some sort of injury or illness or infirmity like simple aging that prevented them from having children through no fault of their own would be sinning even if they were married. Yeah, good luck with trying to get that one past fellow believers. "Sorry, your wife has entered menopause. Yes, I'm aware it's early for her, and she's an astounding good looking woman who looks like a cover model a decade younger, but no more sex for you."

@leahunverferth8247

8 ай бұрын

If you saw an amputee, you wouldn't think "this disproves that the nature of humans is to have 2 legs!" You would automatically know something went wrong with this person because people have 2 legs. Likewise, the fact that some couples can't have children doesn't disprove the fact that it is the nature of man/woman sex to produce children. It is the nature of any other corrupted form of sexuality to not possibly produce children. This does show the damage to society as a whole should homosexuality run rampant and it's a strong argument to prove homosexuality is contrary to the law of nature.

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

People who hold to this procreation argument as to why homosexuality is sinful need to talk to couples like yourself…

@jujuoof174

4 ай бұрын

@@keith6706it’s not like that’ not all Christians, or even catholiques, think like that

@keith6706

4 ай бұрын

@@jujuoof174 I believe I pointed that out in that same comment.

Thank You for This Video

Always speak so intelligently and well versed but I can never seem to figure out where you stand. I know you're simply educating the masses but I'd like to take a deeper dive.

@vmonk2

Жыл бұрын

Like your uneducated opinion would make any difference

Excellent reaction video! Yes, ancient morals & beliefs - even when accurately stated - are no grounds for modern ones when there is so much evidence to refute them. Sadly, your 2 main reasons for homophobia & bigotry today are powerful, with identity politics really dangerous & damaging.

@daekwonrose3160

3 ай бұрын

“Ancient” … man y’all are perishing without even realizing it

What are your believes on sex before marriage, outside of marriage?

@tangerinetangerine4400

2 ай бұрын

Why does it matter?

@chameleonx9253

2 ай бұрын

The same as my beliefs on sex after and inside marriage. If both parties are enthusiastically consenting adults, go for it.

@mdug7224

2 ай бұрын

Is that biblical marriage, i.e.entering a woman and paying the father or capturing an enemy, going into them and claiming them in marriage, or extra biblical marriage such as legal by contract or common marriage by mutual partnership of consenting adults?

So if men having sex is considered immoral and ‘dehumanizing’ because they can’t procreate, is a woman born without the ability to procreate also no longer human since they can’t have kids?

Nothing wrong with being homosexual.

Dictionaries are great for defining one's terms. They are definitely _not_ great at measuring the reasonableness of one's arguments. It's a list of words and meanings, not a debate judge. Well done to point this out, Dr. McLellan.

@SethRGray

3 ай бұрын

Dictionaries aren't actually great for defining terms because all they can capture is general usage. Terms in biblical criticism should be scholarly and specific. Defining your terms is indeed step one, but the resources you use to construct said definition have to be relevant to the field.

@thepubliusproject

3 ай бұрын

@@SethRGray I disagree. In any debate, we have to define our terms. If we're to avoid arguments over the definitions of our terms, we need to use a definition for our words that isn't reasonably contested. And yes, using the definition most relevant to the field, (for example, calf for a podiatrist means something different than it does for a rancher), is appropriate. Otherwise it's kind of a false equivocation. I think you and I are trying to make different points though.

“It’s not something that people are able to choose”…Yeah definitely a Mormon.

@THEalfalfa1

3 ай бұрын

lol wat

So no reverse cow girl?

Wow! You went in much deeper than what I thought. I just assumed that "Sexual Immorality" was sinful (regardless of Gender-preference). Jesus even spoke about a man that even "looks at a woman to LUST for her, has already committed adultery in his heart". With that said, anybody who looks for a sexual outlet, other than for the purposes of marriage with his wife or procreation as a holy act, would be considered sinful.

@hrv4908

8 ай бұрын

You assumed correctly, but you should remember that sexually intimacy is a way in which spouses bond to each other -- they become one.

@jujuoof174

4 ай бұрын

@@hrv4908 Can you do that without sex? I want to live a sexless life as a lesbian and have adopted children and maybe get married although I’m unsure that’s be possible..

The arguments that homosexual sex is a sin because the acts don't produce children would have to mean that an infertile straight couple would be committing sin if they had sex.

Can you debate other Christian’s that disagree with you on this topic? I only see you respond to tic tok videos and never have a face to face conversation with someone who disagrees with this. But I think I know why that conversation will never take place.

I completely agree but I would like to point out that a literal reading of the Bible would not exclude all homosexual acts, sex, between two woman is completely tolerable within the context of this law. So would homoromantic relationships between two men. The law is less strict than people today often think.

I love how you absolutely dismantle bigoted views with proper evidence. So many people don't think and just follow the bigoted interpretations or jump through hoops to justify their beliefs instead of just... not being bigoted. As if it's so hard to just let other people love who they love.

@capitalizingcapitalist1202

Жыл бұрын

What evidence? He did nothing in this video but ignore other passages denouncing homosexuality while telling others they are using fallacies. Dude did literally nothing but pander to folks like yourself.

@christownsend7552

Жыл бұрын

@@capitalizingcapitalist1202Check out previous videos.

@TechySeven

Жыл бұрын

@@capitalizingcapitalist1202 He literally did no such thing. He pointed out how Several biblical authors, especially of the New Testament, absolutely weren't against homosexuality Because of the notion that it's "non-procreative" (Evidenced Rebuttal). He Addressed how Biblical Authors, of their differing time periods, saw homosexuality and Why they most likely saw it that way, as they were against it for the sake of it seeming to favor Male Submissiveness (the Opposite of ignoring other passages). He refuted the notion that it was "Non-Natural". And he further pointed out how the Only Real Reason the anti-homosexual view is held to Religiously in the Modern day is because it favors their geopolitical and/or ideological Agendas. So, it could be argued that your Only problem with it is that it didn't Pander and Kowtow to Your Personal Ideological and/or Geopolitical Biases... and you Hate that... because you WANT to hold to Religious Views that are Faulty, Unjustified, and Bigoted... OR because you already Do hold to such views, and have invested into them for a Long Time.

@vmonk2

Жыл бұрын

@@capitalizingcapitalist1202 another ignoramus telling a biblical scholar saying he’s wrong when you can’t even read the original texts in Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek.

@TheWhyisthatso

9 ай бұрын

@@TechySeven .....Call me a "bigot"...I hate the "community" of PEDOPHILES too ( NOT the people ) and the "community" of MURDERERS as well .....poor me .

Dan, thank you. The points you shared and elucidated is phenomenally enlightening and curative.

@JudeMalachi

3 ай бұрын

Also, phenomenally wrong, lol.

@MusicalRaichu

2 ай бұрын

Yeah I've been researching the issue for ages and I've come to similar conclusions as Dan. He's done a great job.

By the way love your videos.

Those in the Christian cult have to Rationalize and Justify what crap they believe.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Andrew Wilson would destroy this argument easily and the worldview of this being a permissable christian thing.

This apologetic argument is like some sort of abstraction bait-and-switch. On the one hand, they defensively say that they aren't targeting any group of people -- which is suggesting that they don't want to use abstraction, but instead focus on the concrete alone. But then they target that same group using a classification system which is entirely abstract and not in the least bit concrete.

You were my hero after the interview that you had last week. Now I don’t know because I don’t know enough about you.

The few scriptures in The Bible condemning homosexual relations are based on the prohibition in Levitical Law, BUT Christ actually goes against Levitical Law on several occasions. On one of those occasions, when the Pharisees complain about His disciples not washing their hands in the prescribed manner, Christ tells them that it doesn't matter if you are clean on the outside...only on the inside. He then turns to His disciples and says, "In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments OF MEN". In other words, the cultural laws were written by men (the Jewish priests), and not by God. As far as the story of Sodom, The Bible actually states what the "sin" of Sodom is (Ezekiel 16:49), and the verse begins "Now THIS was the sin of your sister Sodom..." The sin being the wealthy ignoring the poor and needy. Christ does not address the issue, and Paul (who was NOT Christ), based his views on Levitical Law.

@shootergavin3541

Жыл бұрын

If the sin of Sodom was that wealthy people ignoring the poor, than what makes Sodom different than any other place on the earth at that time or any time in human history? Sodom was destroy was not because of a specific sin it committed. Usually wicked people commit a variety of sins. Jude mentions that that sexual immorality was a problem in Sodom. The reason Sodom was singled out and destroyed is that the people were so wicked and unrepentant that God could not find even 10 righteous people there. God chapter 18 God and Abraham have a conversation. God plans to destroy the city but Abraham is worried that righteous people will be killed. Verse 24 "Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?" In verse 26 it says "And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes." The conversation continues until they get to where if God find even 10 righteous people, the city will be spared in verse 32 "And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake." When a city or nation becomes so rot with sin and wickedness that they will not repent, will not turn to righteousness and reject God completely, there is no value for that city or nation to continue. It becomes rotten to the core and God will destroy it. Gay people lived in Sodom and their sins contributed to the wickedness of Sodom but there was a lot of heterosexual sins that also was a part of the problem. The wickedness went beyond sexual sins. As I said, wicked people don't just commit one kind of sin and are righteous in every other aspects of their lives. They tend to commit a lot of different kinds of sin like neglecting the poor ect. {For LDS viewers as I suppose there are a few here, research the issues of "ripening in iniquity" or something being fully rip in iniquity. Similar conditions that got Sodom destroyed is what got the people in Noah day destroyed andis what got cities in the Book of Mormon destroyed and similar conditions will occur before Christ comes again. The principles that got Sodom destroyed still apply today and will happen again at some point in the future. When a society as a whole becomes so wicked that it loves sin, rejects God, and will not repent, God then clears the board as there is no use for that society to continue.]

@granvillesimmons6033

Жыл бұрын

@@shootergavin3541 The point however is that The Bible states that the wealthy ignoring the poor was the chief "sin", not homosexuality, as many people wrongly believe. But I would agree with you that there were almost certainly other sins the people were committing. Many Christians have a very limited, myopic view of The Bible, like their ignorance of Levitical Law (and it's total invalidity) or this weird concept that St.Paul's opinions were equivalent to Christ's doctrines. A lot of this comes from the "doctrine" of biblical infallibility, which in essence says that The Bible IS God, because ONLY God is infallible. The "Word of God" is also clearly defined in The Bible (John 1:1), and it's not a what, but a WHO. Good post, by the way.

Nice equivocation fallacy around the 5:30 mark. The natural order doesn’t mean according to nature in Aristotle. It means some more akin to the proper teleology of something.

Dan: ‘we *know* same sex attraction is natural.’ But how would he go with that statement. How about wanting to have multiple younger-much much younger than he is ? Dan doesn’t explain what he means by he ‘knows’

@PennyDreadful2024

Ай бұрын

We know because of psychological studies. We know because conversion therapy failed and only caused more trauma. We know because we see it in nature. We know because of the stories of the struggless of gay people. And we know because not one single element of human development is perfect. Why would sexual and romantic attraction be the one perfect aspect of human development?

unfortunately, an intelligent response is always going to fail with bigots. But you have to keep trying.

@joecheffo5942

6 ай бұрын

I think the internet is giving people the other side now. Society can change. National opinion on gay marriage changed. It's a slow process though. I don't know if when I opposed gay marriage decades ago I was a bigot. I can barely remember why I even though it was wrong. I was going through a religious phase, thats part. So culturally and religiously brainwashed I guess.

@bengreen171

6 ай бұрын

@@joecheffo5942 fair enough. I suppose I was being a little hyperbolic for rhetorical effect. You're right, society can and does change - but it's difficult. People need to be willing to change though, and that's the problem. they don't like change being forced upon them, it needs to come from within.

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

⁠@@joecheffo5942that’s fair! I was against my own sexuality because I was taught(indoctrinated) from a young age that it was wrong and sinful. The deeper into religion I went the more I fought it. The less “religious” and freer in my faith I became, the more accepting I became of my sexuality

@MusicalRaichu

2 ай бұрын

@@joecheffo5942 i used to think it was wrong but only because of the two references in the bible in 1 cor 6.9 and 1 tim 1.10. i just without thinking presumed there must be some reason for it, and like dan says it felt icky. when i discovered that those verses were mistranslated, i changed my mind pretty quickly.

but isn't the natural world a fallen world?

Oh, there's that archery again. Sheesh.

Can you discuss further in detail - about the reasoning of having sex to produce children, or casually in marriage or unmarried - in the bible. *And thank you!

Sharing to socials.

Paul said that every man should have a wife and every women should have a husband.

Where do i get a magic napkin for my head?

Dictatorary fallacy does that really exist? I looked it up and from what I found it's not a thing.

Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. "Sin" is a concept religions created to "other" and oppress people. It has no place in reality. Good video!

What even is sin at this point

Identity politics are a distinct part of American and world politics.

Also dictionary fallacy is BS if we could just make up meanings of words then words have no meaning.

Does the rule of not lying with a man as with a woman apply to their slaves? So far, my understanding of biblical laws is that they applied to Isrealites while foreign slaves were possessions, not people.

Thank you. I love God and I do accept Jesus as my lord and savior but there’s people who throw Leviticus at me and other verses that I’m sure they themselves have misunderstood and misconstrued, because I am a woman with a woman. I don’t have the yearning to procreate, I feel like the earth is way too overpopulated enough. Why add to it? We’d be perfectly fine adopting kids in need of loving homes. I hate how some look down on you when you say you don’t want to conceive a child. Jesus didn’t have a child, I guess they look down on Jesus too….

Paul is so brilliant, saying that a husband and his wife should come together for intercourse so that they won't have sexual desire!! 😂 In this one line in 1st Corinthians 7 the germ of the Catholic theory of the transmission of Original Sin is present. 😠😡🤬

In the racy Song of Solomon there is no mention of procreation

I see you missed out Leviticus!

I think I’m going to get “dirty dirty Gentiles who don’t know God” on a tshirt

Sex is a gift from God. Some Christian churches seem really confused about it. I had a SBC father and boy was that confusing!

If sex was about procreation, that would mean my grandparents had to have had sex at least twice. My intuitive revulsion to things I find icky is telling me otherwise…

@harrymurray9702

5 ай бұрын

If what you say is true, then having children would not matter, and no one would exist. pleasure is a byproduct for procreation, an incentive. Any child understands this....

@homosexualbiologicalmaleexit

4 ай бұрын

​@@harrymurray9702biological males have sex for pleasure not for procreation ,

@homosexualbiologicalmaleexit

4 ай бұрын

​@@harrymurray9702it don't matter if it would not be anymore people born , you don't decide for each individualist biological males , we are living in that time where each biological male decide for himself only

Hmm, I'm not sure I'm understanding Dan's framing of Paul's perspective. In 1 Cor 7, I see Paul acknowledging desire and prohibiting sexual neglect, and that people should have sex to prevent Satan from tempting. The only time he suggests should they should explicitly be "apart" is for prayer. Where does he say sex should "not be with the passion of desire" like the Gentiles, or that people should ONLY have JUST enough sex to suppress desire? I feel like I'm missing something.

@leahunverferth8247

8 ай бұрын

You're not missing anything. Dan is wrong

@AurorXZ

8 ай бұрын

@@leahunverferth8247 It seems I missed 1 Thess 1:3-5. There it speaks about taking a vessel with holiness and honor, not with lustful passion like the gentiles.

@leahunverferth8247

8 ай бұрын

Yeah, there's definitely the contrast between using sexuality in a holy/honorable way vs. the inordinate passion of the gentiles in chapter 4. But interpreting this as limiting sex in a lawful context (marriage) to as little as possible is false. The gentle world is full of adultery, homosexuality, even bestiality and other acts of fornication. Don't be like them who will satisfy themselves with whatever they can. Act in a controlled, lawful way. No premarital sex, no adultery, etc. Many more applications could be made but none of this limits the lawful expression of sexuality in marriage (except as concerns the needs of the man or woman - did the woman just have a baby? Is someone sick?, Etc).

@AurorXZ

8 ай бұрын

​@@leahunverferth8247 Yeah, there are various ways to read it. "Not with passionate lust" insofar as it infringes on decency, or "not with passionate lust" insofar as it is passionate. Unfortunately early church fathers were prone to the total exclusionary interpretation, it seems. Augustine was lamentably mechanical in how he saw marriage duties.

What about Leviticus 20:13 that says If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them? I personally don't subscribe with the whole concept of sin in Christianity, but could you address this?

@dertechl6628

Жыл бұрын

Unless you are from Isreael these rules don't apply.

@Dieg0xCl0ut

5 ай бұрын

Don't you know that the unrighteous will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be deceived: No sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, or anyone practicing homosexuality, no thieves, greedy people, drunkards, verbally abusive people, or swindlers will inherit God's kingdom. - 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

@mdug7224

2 ай бұрын

​​@@Dieg0xCl0utin this context, sexual immorality also includes having sex to have children, rather than just satiating desire with one's woman. Paul and Jesus were both against further procreation at that time.

@hineraable

Ай бұрын

It's the same logic found here, the act of men laying with each other as "they would with women" was considered sinful because it went against the hierarchy of "men should always be on top".

Who are you to adjudicate what is an “unreasonably” held belief?

Wouldn't the same arguments be made about Pedophilia?.........having sex with animals......etc.

were Sarai and Abram living in sin when they couldn't have children?

@JudeMalachi

3 ай бұрын

They did have a child, so no.

Ye gods, I need to save this video to show anyone who try to tell me it's a sin.

@truthseeker4286

17 күн бұрын

OK, so your new God is Dan I see.

The Kandarian demon from the evil dead movies was a homosexual demon.

A dictionary is a book of history, not a book of law.

I am almost 100% sure Jesus literally says Homosexuals are sinners in one verse. I even saw it recently quoted. Unless this is argued as mistranslated i have no idea why people claim this when Jesus blankly says it at least once i am almost certain.

@endswithme555

5 ай бұрын

Verse please?

@chandllerburse737

5 ай бұрын

@@endswithme555 Look it up i can’t and i have no bible on me.

@magroves

3 ай бұрын

It's in leviticus and Paul's letters only

@bananas6194

Ай бұрын

I’ve read all of the New Testament, he never says anything about homosexuality. He does talk about marriage between man and woman tho I’m pretty sure. Only Paul talks about sexual immorality (the gays)

@chandllerburse737

Ай бұрын

@@bananas6194 Then doesn’t pauls word mean something

So sin or not sin?

I'm just distracted by what he's wearing on his head. I'm guessing that it's some sort of religious thing, either that or he put a strip of material over his head and wanted to be taken seriously.

Thank you Dr. Dan for explaining how changes in societal norms show that God and the Bible were wrong and should be altered and re-interpreted to meet the new progressive standards of society.

@truthseeker4286

17 күн бұрын

"Progressive standards of society" Ha ha ha how's that working out? To follow your your and Dan's view is to watch society continue and accelerate in its degeneracy and ultimate failure. Yes, I know this is going to stir up the hateful bigots on this thread who want every imaginable deviant sex act, which perverts their bodies, to not only be accepted, but demand celebration.

Matt everhard should watch this.

So if I don’t have sex with a man I am not committing a sin

Everything Dan McClellan doesn’t agree with is a fallacy. The Dan Fan Fallacy.

I'm bigoted against people who commit crimes, not because I can see that their acts are wrong in our socially constructed idea of wrong, but because my intuition tells me murder and traffic violations are icky

@tripleraze321

Жыл бұрын

Indeed, the line needs to be empathy. Murder hurts people on every way. A guy being born gay and wanting to live with another gay guy doesn’t hurt my heterosexuality at all.

@b.l.8755

Жыл бұрын

@@tripleraze321 Neither of us are better than convicted murderers. The imprisoned deserve just as much empathy as our mothers.

@tripleraze321

Жыл бұрын

@@b.l.8755 I agree with you 100%, in fact it is because of our empathy, that we are obligated to hold people who commit murder accountable. Being empathetic does not negate or remove accountability, it actually requires it. It is your empathy for the child murdered, or even more personal, the empathy for yourself understanding how much it would hurt you to be murdered. This, despite attempting to have empathy and understanding the attacker, also demands accountability to prevent such hurt being inflicted again. You are right much of our interaction is a social construct, and what could better guide the further construction or even removal of past constructs, than empathy. Empathy should be the guide we use to make social decisions, and it’s that reason I would never condemn or judge someone gay. They are not hurting me or my family at all.

@b.l.8755

Жыл бұрын

@@tripleraze321 it seems they receive nothing but complete support or complete condemnation. Where is the gay married pastor that preaches to gay Christians against the obvious harms they do to each other in the gay sexual community?

@TheManWithNoHands

Жыл бұрын

@@b.l.8755 The "harm" done by those in the LGBT community is no different from the "harm" done by the straight community. Both communities have the capacity for abuse of all types, and both can commit any crime. As for where the gay, married pastors are, I'm sure you realize the difficulty of finding that subset. The amount of people fitting the category of Christian[Married[LGBT-friendly church[Gay[Desire to preach[Church in need of a preacher[Church allowing of LGBT leadership]]]]]] is, I'd wager, an incredibly small community to say the least. Also I'm sure that pastor would still be preaching to a primarily straight audience, considering demographics.

Now I know why you dislike the KJV..

Criticizes other guy for "an entirely arbitrary assertion about what the mark is that sin misses" → Proceeds to present an entirely arbitrary assertion about what the mark is that sin misses

@exillens

Жыл бұрын

The "mark" in biblical terms is the noahide laws and Torah. So according to the hebrew bible if you're not obeying the Torah 100% you're missing the mark. Of course Paul and other "new testament" writers came up with a more nebulous meaning for "sin" since Paul didn't think the Torah was relevant anymore to please their god at least not for "gentiles".

@tripleraze321

Жыл бұрын

This analysis shows someone missed the mark. And since the mark was missed the discussion here has inaccurately been reduced to something else.

So is it or is it not (a sin)?? All you did was pontificate... What is the answer genius? We all tuned in for a DEFINITIVE answer & you left us hanging . I read that sex before marriage is a sin, is that a lie?

I can’t speak to the textusl scholarship here, but there’s some really bad moral philosophy/meta-ethics going on here. The notmative point on same-sex marriage is flatout rejected as either a) a posthoc rationalization for some non-cognitive attitude, or b) as instrumental for the sake of some political good. Thus, you’re either assuming some version of expressivism/emotivism about moral language or some kind of consequentialism about reasons for holding any notmative belief (or both together). Neither position seems to be attributable to any of the authors of the old Testament (expressivism/emotivism as a moral theory is maybe 200 years old at most; consequentialism also doesn’t sit easily, since God’s commandments are afaik exceptionless and characters, e.g. Saul, who take shortcuts for expediency’s sake are punished severely). There ultimately seems to be an assumption of moral/historical relativism working in the background that just blocks any attempt at finding transcendent truth-claims in the Biblical texts ab initio. This position seems better suited to a skeptic rather than someone who thinks any truth for us can be derived from the Bible.

Yes, but if they consider the Bible God's actial words, every word true and supported by the authority of God then the argument of culture and society of that time has no meaning today would not be valid to people who have elevated the bible to be equal to God.

*Equivocation on sin:* The apologist should have combined his two sources on sin and admitted that the “mark” sin misses is bibical dictates, not the good of humanity. Instead, he goes against his first citation and claims sin is about not doing good for people. We don’t need a lot of babies. We would do better with fewer babies and less oppression, so ending homophobia would be good for humanity.

@trapd00rspider

Жыл бұрын

I agree with most of this but it's weird seeing a science-named account alluding to a long debunked idea of overpopulation, not to mention ignoring the fact that heaps of gay people want and have biological offspring. In fact reducing homophobia tends to make way for more gay families. Homosexuality isn't a solution to any ecological or economic problems.

@scienceexplains302

Жыл бұрын

@@trapd00rspider Overpopulation comes across in multiple ways. Rainforests are steadily disappearing to make houses, and grow food. We need them to breathe well. We have global warming due to excess CO2 production, which is in part of function of population. About 3 billion birds are killed annually by house cats. We could manage these issues more easily if there were fewer people. Did you assume that immediate food supply is the only issue?

@scienceexplains302

Жыл бұрын

My post was about the good of humanity. Denigrating people for how they were born goes against that. More gay families means a lower population growth, since a higher percentage of them adopt children.

Thanks for posting I really can’t listen to this kid anymore 😂😢😢😢😢😢😢