Posted on 02/24/2014 5:51:18 AM PST by xzins
Jesus Christ would absolutely bake a cake for a gay person. He’d bake a cake for a straight person. He’d bake a cake for a girl, a boy, a person who isn’t sure what they are, a black person, a white person — Jesus would bake that cake if it, in some way large or small, drew that person closer to Him.
And Christians should too.
Christians should show love and compassion to gays, straights, and everyone else. Christians should show God’s love in hopes of drawing people to a relationship with Christ. 95% of that may just be relationship building, but it should still be done.
If a Christian owns a bakery or a florist shop or a photography shop or a diner, a Christian should no more be allowed to deny service to a gay person than to a black person. It is against the tenets of 2000 years of orthodox Christian faith, no matter how poorly some Christians have practiced their faith over two millennia.
And honestly, I don’t know that I know anyone who disagrees with any of this.
The disagreement comes on one issue only — should a Christian provide goods and services to a gay wedding. That’s it. We’re not talking about serving a meal at a restaurant. We’re not talking about baking a cake for a birthday party. We’re talking about a wedding, which millions of Christians view as a sacrament of the faith and other, mostly Protestant Christians, view as a relationship ordained by God to reflect a holy relationship.
This slope is only slippery if you grease it with hypotheticals not in play.
There are Christians who have no problem providing goods and services for a gay marriage. Some of them are fine with gay marriage. Some of them think gay marriage is wrong, but they still have no problem providing goods and services.
Other Christians, including a significant number of Catholic and Protestant preachers, believe that a gay marriage is a sinful corruption of a relationship God himself ordained. Because they try to glorify God through their work, they believe they cannot participate in a wedding service. Yes, because they believe they are glorifying God in their work and view it as a ministry, they view providing goods and services as a way to advance, even in a small way, God’s kingdom.
Herein lies the dispute of the day. The latter group does not stand in the way of the former group providing cakes, flowers, and pictures for a gay wedding. Some of the former, however, believe the government should compel the latter group to violate their conscience. They only see the transaction through the customer’s eyes as if the vendors are passive participants.
That’s the problem.
We are not talking about race. We are not talking about restaurants. We are talking about a specific ceremony people of faith believe God himself created and ordained. Should the state force people to violate their conscience in that regard?
It is not staggering that there are aggrieved gay rights activists who think the state should be able to force people to recognize as normal that which most Christians view as sinful. What is staggering is the number of Christians who apparently think the State has the right to decide and enforce this issue.
You might think Jesus would bake a cake for a gay wedding. I think you are wrong. I do not think Jesus Christ would participate in the ratification of a sin — and a marriage between two people of the same sex is a sin. Are you really going to tell the millions of Christians in the United States who think otherwise that not only are they wrong, but the state should be able to force your opinion of what Jesus would do on them? In your pride, you might think 2000 years of Christian orthodoxy and the majority of practicing Christians in the world today are wrong — but don’t think among people of practicing Christian faith you are in the majority.
I understand if you are not a believer and define yourself based on your sexual preference that you think the government should legitimize you by forcing others to treat you in a particular way. But it boggles my mind to think any Christian should want the government to force their view of Christianity on another believer.
If you think the government should be able to force Christians to provide goods and services to a gay wedding or risk losing their business, why not command a preacher’s service? If a Christian baker cannot opt out, why should a preacher be able to opt out? And why not take from churches their tax exempt status if they fail to participate?
Christians should serve. But the government should not force them to.
This is a confusing claim. You need only go as far as Exodus International to find a self help group that is in fact involved in the process of repenting!
And God is angry that it should need a special purpose self help group. Why not every church in every town!
Also, it sounds like you may be implicitly putting special requirements on them that you in fact would not on other kinds of sinners. And they are very expectedly caused to stumble by that.
It is a long, arduous, cross-laden process. Not a finger snap.
Would like you like to learn approaches that work better?
If someone came in and asked for a cake for their abortion party, I am sure they would say NO too
And this has just what to do with just what?
Bakers should be able to say NO. Whether someone wants a cake for their 15-year old daughters first orgy, abortion party or whatever sin.
Off topic again, as common for you recently.
And fine, if normal 1st amendment protections applied they could refuse serving occasions that were clearly wrong. That’s a far cry from “making a cake for a ‘gay’ person.” “We will not knowingly serve a faux marriage” is not the same as “no ‘gay’ may purchase anything here.”
I perceive that people are creating bogus disputes here when in fact there are some real, solid issues to be considered. And that’s a sign of yielding to the devil’s game.
Okay, so what is the topic of this thread?
Someone else pushed it into the area which I answered. That does not excuse your distorting the topic I treated.
I read down until I got a post that I was thinking of. Can you imagine what Jesus would have done if homosexuals were fornicating in the temple? Movies portray Jesus as this hippy type metrosexual going through life trying to make everyone feel good about their life choices. That is B.S. Jesus was willing to forgive but a was man's man when to people going against the will of the Father and refusing to change.
I repeat for your willfully ignorant ears to absorb, Yeshua was never a carpenter.
And the particular wording in the modern Bibles is not from the early MS. It is how it was changed to take Joseph’s name out.
>> “Isn’t there something in the Bible about people giving Him a hard time for eating with the heathens and other lowlifes, as they saw them?” <<
.
That was specifically the day he recruited Matthew, a Cohen by birth, but a toll taker for the Roman Gov’t.
He was the first author of a New Testament book.
But Yeshua didn’t in any way endorse Matthew’s old life. He didn’t make him the head of his Publican Division.
.
Don’t be ridiculous. Nobody said that baking cakes is more sacred than the Passion of Christ. This only applies Jesus’ teachings to an issue we are faced with today. The left refuse to understand that Christians are forbidden to participate in ceremonies celebrating homosexual behavior. They also refuse to understand that Christians are forbidden to judge those afflicted by sin as being more deplorable than the sin itself. Seeking to follow in Jesus’ footprints is not an insult to Jesus. It is an insult to Satan.
Are you talking about Jesus baking them a cake to celebrate their salvation? What does that have to do with the difference between simply engaging in commerce without regard for your customers’ sin, and engaging in commerce in such a way that you become a participant in the sin?
Jesus would never bake a cake for anyone. Nor would he prepare a meal for himself or anyone else.
The Bible is replete with passages where Jesus is eating and being served food cooked by women. (It was a cultural thing—Jewish men did not cook or bake. I know many who still don’t!)
Jesus even dragged Peter’s poor mother-in-law out of her sickbed to rustle up some grub for him and the guys!
Jesus would more likely be singing like Elvis: “Get out in that kitchen and rattle those pots and pans”, especially when in the home of his friend, Martha.
Yep. That’s pretty much where the author of the article came down.
John 12:32 KJV And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
The author said Jesus would NOT NOT NOT bake a cake for a gay wedding. And that because it would violate His beliefs. I agree with that.
But I also think that if a gay walked into Joseph’s carpenter shop that Jesus would not refuse to sell him a chair.
Nice twist!
Matthew 15:
[22] And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
[23] But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
[24] But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
[25] Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
[26] But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
[27] And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.
[28] Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.