Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@CrossExamined says : Download FREE Cheat Sheet “The 4-Point Case For Christianity” 👉📱https://cutt.ly/ZYMC4nl>> <<@Harvester_462 says : ❤>> <<@Tomtomtom-j4t says : What about intersex people , who can they marry? Maybe time for Frank and some Christians to grow up and get educated…. I won’t hold my breath though>> <<@sjcobra84 says : I have never been married and I never will. I have seen too many divorces and broken families. Mine been one of them. And I have trauma from the church. My life, my choice.>> <<@Greg-n6t says : If you get a abortion should you be sterilized>> <<@fletcher373 says : What a dumb question.>> <<@rainegoldberg9376 says : 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻❤️❤️🙏🏻>> <<@AubreyLeoneDoLofonos4747 says : Wow, the stink is strong in this one>> <<@JP-ec9rl says : The rise of these completely nihilistic generations with no moral boundaries just keep pushing humanity closer and closer to the culmination of revelation. What's worse is that more and more are completely blind to the fact that they're doing it.>> <<@tikka243412 says : I wish preachers, apologists and Biblical religious teachers would define marriage before getting into debates about marriage. The governments only role in marriage is to award property to one person or the other in divorce court. They stand for nothing else. They can legalize this or that union and pass all the immoral laws they want. God is the creator of marriage and it’s the sexual union between a man and a woman that makes the two one flesh. The one flesh is the marriage. Certain peoples throughout time have had different ceremonies to celebrate the first night of the union or the marriage. Infertile or not the two become one flesh.>> <<@tahirasbs says : And why does noone ever consider adoption>> <<@IntentionalityMentor says : Frank knocks it out of the 'gotcha question’ park!>> <<@marilynscott2662 says : Yes we did not have children we couldn't.But God sent us 5 Foster children. One needed to be saved after the way her mum treated her>> <<@derrickcarson says : Frank be dropping those knowledge nuggets!>> <<@markjapan4062 says : INFERTILE PEOPLE HAVE BABIES TO... GOD FIXES THEM>> <<@lenbkula says : That was some fire you were spitting at the end there 🔥🔥>> <<@SM-sk1sm says : You need to think out side of the box. EVERYTHING inside the firmament ..vault.Dome . We live on a Flat Plane. Genesis 1:6-18. Plus, YHWH said on the 7th day I rested. Thereby, EVERYTHING was created in 6 days. This is for are guidance. There is No such thing as time. Constantine XII Yohn 3:17>> <<@jeslovesjesus says : Just because Drs tell you that you’re infertile doesn’t mean God can’t do a miracle. I know countless people who were told they would never have kids and now…have multiple kids. God still does miracles ❤>> <<@MrFossil367ab45gfyth says : Anyone can get married if you think about.>> <<@aaronmonroe7932 says : ●John 13 21 Now Jesus was deeply troubled,[f] and he exclaimed, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me!” 22 The disciples looked at each other, wondering whom he could mean. 23 The disciple Jesus loved was sitting next to Jesus at the table.[g] 24 Simon Peter motioned to him to ask, “Who’s he talking about?” 25 So that disciple leaned over to Jesus and asked, “Lord, who is it?” ☆Berean Standard Bible Leaning back against Jesus, he asked, “Lord, who is it?” ☆Berean Literal Bible Then he thus having leaned on the breast of Jesus, says to Him, "Lord, who is it?" ☆King James Bible He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it? ☆New King James Version Then, leaning back on Jesus’ breast, he said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” ☆New American Standard Bible He then simply leaned back on Jesus’ chest and said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” ☆NASB 1995 He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” ☆NASB 1977 He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ breast, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” ☆Legacy Standard Bible He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” ☆Amplified Bible Then leaning back against Jesus’ chest, he (John) asked Him [privately], “Lord, who is it?” ●John 19 25 Standing near the cross were Jesus’ mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary (the wife of Clopas), and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother standing there beside the disciple he loved, he said to her, “Dear woman, here is your son.” 27 And he said to this disciple, “Here is your mother.” And from then on this disciple took her into his home. ●John 20 1 Early on Sunday morning,[a] while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance. 2 She ran and found Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved. She said, “They have taken the Lord’s body out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” 3 Peter and the other disciple started out for the tomb. 4 They were both running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first>> <<@deathbyathousandcats says : Sad thing about Hannah and Rachel's infertility though, God made them barren, and then opened their womb (remembered). Weird things>> <<@franciscocepeda8416 says : Because infertility is real adoption becomes the solution to prevent abortion>> <<@nicholasclarke8182 says : What a silly question>> <<@tTtt-ho3tq says : But there's no marriage in heaven. Which means there's no procreation nor sex or no new born baby in heaven. Although there's no sexual desire either. So I hear.>> <<@redfaux74 says : Liberals shouldn't be able to marry. 😕>> <<@jeffreybomba says : The fact that sex within the confines of Godly marriage has to be tied to trying to make babies is a biblical travesty. Paul tells us to get married instead of burning with lust. Does someone honestly think he means lusting to have children? I especially love the legalist that thing The Song of Solomon has no direct marriage application and instead is just a allegory where God uses behaviors legalist call detestable in order to describe His love for us.>> <<@ryanjennens1481 says : if you wait till youre married to have sex, how would you know youre infertile until after youre married??>> <<@ashemgold says : Answering questions from people who do NOT desire truth is something I will never engage in. Every man, woman and child has heavenly witness that dispels every non-Biblical argument they might have on full display to them every day in creation, relationships and the fruit of the actions of mankind. I will rather spend my time Biblically presenting the good news to a lost world the DESIRES to hear and winning the "whosoever will" and happily ignoring and rebuking the arrogant and pompous "whosoever won't".>> <<@toemoss32 says : So it is allowing gay people to be themselves and have fair treatment under the law that is ruining society AND NOT persecuting and demonizing people for things they can’t control and acting as if they are a problem? God obviously forgot to give a few of you brain cells>> <<@EndTimesHarvest says : I want to add onto Frank's point at the end about how feminism wants women to be behave more like men sexually, chiefly, of being promiscuous. This is what I never understood about feminism: women have always rightfully pointed out the immoral sexual behaviour of men, of how they can act like horn dogs who only want casual sex. But what is feminism's answer to this? For women to also be sexually immoral in the same way. In other words, feminism wants women stoop to the same (or worse) level of men when it comes to sexual behaviour.>> <<@christianelaxton2809 says : The fact that God wants us to wait until we’re married before even having sex….how would you know if you’re fertile or not?>> <<@joelercoaster says : It’s common sense heterosexual is normal.. if everyone was gay we would Go extinct, that tells you everything you need to know about what’s right.>> <<@houstonsam6163 says : There is a clear argument against the legality of homosexual marriage, but in a pluralistic society which provides maximum freedom of belief or non-belief that argument cannot be based on anything Biblical or Judeo-Christian even in tradition. When we consider the legality of homosexual marriage we must consider what marriage means in law, not in faith. At its root, legally marriage is the presumption of paternity. When a married woman gets pregnant and has a child, the law presumes that woman's husband is the father of the child, and both recognizes his rights and enforces his obligations as the father. This is why marriage is a legal relationship; marriage is a contract that binds not only the husband and wife, but all of society around them as well, because marriage is the legal presumption of paternity. This is not just the meaning in current US law, it is why marriage has been a relationship recognized by authority, whether civil or ecclesiastical, throughout western history and before. Whether or not a couple actually has children, or even can have children, is not relevant. Legal marriage is not about the *fact* of parenthood, it is about the *presumption* of paternity, and that presumption is maintained for all couples getting married, in any state of reproductive health, at any age. Turek speaks effectively here about marriage modeling the Divine design for societal stability, but unfortunately Christians themselves have fully participated in the destruction of that model. We can no longer call on it to defend marriage when we have participated in destroying it. We can argue against homosexual marriage for ourselves by reference to our faith, but we cannot argue against homosexual marriage in the law on faith terms, only on the terms of practical legal outcomes. Without regard for Obergefell, homosexual marriage is a contradiction in terms. It is logically, by definition, impossible because the presumption of paternity is a meaningless consideration in a homosexual union. In practical terms the legality of homosexual marriage will reduce family law to an insoluble set of contradictions.>> <<@one_bone_4_life647 says : Preach>> <<@madreamer says : The government shouldn't be involved with marriages imho.>> <<@InitialPC says : but then why is there no marriage on the new earth then? people keep saying "oh well we dont need to procreate then" even you have said this so why does that suddenly fly out the window here?>> <<@Malhaloc says : Not only that, but God can and has caused the infertile to bear children. That is His domain. He can heal the body and fix what is broken. God cannot and will not cause a man to get pregnant or a woman to get pregnant by another woman. That is not a matter of fixing what is broken, that would be a matter of completely going against the design for which He made our bodies in the first place.>> <<@pinguy2334 says : Christians hate infertile people but they hate gays more.>> <<@valhallafanmail4011 says : Good answer, Frank. I would also point out that when God created woman it was also also to be a "help meet" or companion, and so procreation was definitely not the only reason for marriage.>> <<@SPNSO-js4hx says : There's only ONE relationship that carries with it the potential for creating human life, and that's between a man and a woman. Many women get told "they can't have kids" and lo and behold, the doctors are wrong and they do eventually get pregnant.>> <<@OldMan339 says : Jesus is Lord>> <<@INTJerk says : Here's the most succinct way of describing original marriage: it is to serve as a sort of fireplace to the fire that is the procreative behavior inherent in heterosexual pairings. Whether or not the procreative act does in fact produce a child every single time is not the point. The point is that - IF AND WHEN IT DOES - it takes place in what has been deemed the ideal, most loving and natural environment i.e. the permanent, monogamous setting between a man and woman. Now to more directly address the question: first of all, it's not practical to know or predict with certainty that one of the spouses is and will always be infertile. Second, even in the hypothetical scenario, it would be exceedingly likely that at least one of the spouses WOULD BE fertile. In the case of the husband, he will likely be capable of impregnating a woman his entire life. This threat therefore could lead to terrible social costs if the aforementioned spouse broke their vow and started having extramarital affairs. Given this proper understanding, it becomes pointless to invoke the same-sex couple and ponder how they figure into any of this...>> <<@jecos1966 says : It's only been the past 200 years that people got married for romantic love before that, they married to unite two families just look in the bible they would pay money for a virgin, So do you think the virgin girl be in love with the man?>> <<@yellow8954 says : For a second he sounded like Cody>> <<@Yipper64 says : 2:30 this is a complete and utter myth by the way. Firstly less than 10% (if you're generous) of art we've found from that era was homosexual in nature. And also most stories that where said to feature homosexuality... don't. It's just a man saying he loves another man. Platonically, very obviously platonic love.>> <<@rachelrasmussen1101 says : Yes, homosexuality has always existed, and has certain cultures where it's more ubiquitous. The same can be said for morbid obesity. Doesn't improve your outcomes for embracing it though.>> <<@kizdog1796 says : such a good video God bless u bro>> <<@Ezekiel336-16 says : This is one of the reasons why I appreciate Catholicism. Married people have to be "open" to children, which most definitely includes adoption or taking care of another's kid(s). In Christ, Andrew>> <<@Derek_Baumgartner says : Looking to Rome as an example of how to handle sexual relations is a bad idea, and I'll give you one word why: Sporus. If you already know who Sporus is, then you do not need me to write out what happened to him. If you do not know who Sporus is, but you are aware even just generally of the sexual depravity of the Rome, its emperors, and its culture, you don't need to look him up. But if you do not know who Sporus is *and* you think Rome's sexual ethic is a model for modern civilization, I cautiously urge you to examine what happened to this person. There is a horrid and old saying that I think properly sums up the awful view of the Greco-Roman sexual ethic - this wicked saying itself may have emerged later than Rome, I am not sure, but historically it represents what they demonstrated to believe: "Women are for children, but boys are for pleasure" ====== Those who genuinely look to Rome as a model of sexual ethics as - of all things - a 'gotcha' moment remind me of something from Hosea 4: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge".>> <<@nicholasemond1388 says : How do illegitimate children hurt society? And also didn’t god tell Abraham to have sex with someone who was not his wife cause she was infertile?>>