Yes, Jesus Would Bake A Cake for a Gay Person

[PsyOps]

Then, you'd think the least followers could do would be to get along with folks, sell some flowers and wedding cakes and leave the judging to Him. These sorts of absurd absolute positions are not in keeping with His teachings, let alone His example, do not further the interests of Christianity and, in fact, marginalize it and harm it. This is to say nothing of harming ones own personal fortunes, potentially ending business's and the negative impact that would have on those of faith.

And this is where I'm coming from. I frown on Christians rejecting anyone. But I have a much bigger frown on a community that would demand a law that would force businesses to operate a certain way. It might just serve the community better to boycott that business out of business.

 

[Larry Gude]

And this is where I'm coming from. I frown on Christians rejecting anyone. But I have a much bigger frown on a community that would demand a law that would force businesses to operate a certain way. It might just serve the community better to boycott that business out of business.

A certain way? "We sell wedding cakes!" Really? To Jews? Sure! Adulterers? Why not? Gamblers? Of course! Atheists? Well, OK. Those who take the Lords name in vain? Sometimes...Homosexuals? Hell no!!!!!!!!!!

It is sad to see the faith foist itself on the 'gay' petard.

 

[Larry Gude]

When you say community, you mean the law; government dictating how businesses are run. Where does the line begin and end with government doing what they interpret as ‘the better good for the community’ and religious freedom?

Who is the gummint??? If we're talking, as usual, feds getting involved, I agree; butt out. But, when we're not, as in, as I understand it, this case, the gummint is the local community. And this isn't dictating anything. Wanna sell wedding cakes? Here's the rules, have at it.

 

[PsyOps]

A certain way? "We sell wedding cakes!" Really? To Jews? Sure! Adulterers? Why not? Gamblers? Of course! Atheists? Well, OK. Those who take the Lords name in vain? Sometimes...Homosexuals? Hell no!!!!!!!!!!

It is sad to see the faith foist itself on the 'gay' petard.

You are obviously taking my post out of context. Please try to separate how I feel about Christians behaving this way and how I feel about individual liberty. My personal feelings on this do not trump individual liberty.

 

[PsyOps]

Who is the gummint??? If we're talking, as usual, feds getting involved, I agree; butt out. But, when we're not, as in, as I understand it, this case, the gummint is the local community. And this isn't dictating anything. Wanna sell wedding cakes? Here's the rules, have at it.

If the people decide to elect a government that places such limits on a person’s ability to run their own business, then (as my siggy says) “you get the government you deserve”. These things open the door for the government, at any level, dictating how your business gets run. Again, I’d rather the market dictate these things. I think these things end up naturally solving themselves.

 

[b23hqb]

Am I interpreting you as saying that if a Christian running a business that consciously serves a gay person puts their salvation at risk?

If you are, you're way off base. I was asserting nothing such, and don't see how you came to that conclusion. Once you are saved, always saved. Salvation, confessed by one through the work of Christ by his death, burial, and resurrection and ascension, is a done deal.

I was simply asserting that once one has determined a path to follow, i.e. - the Bible or not - they have made a choice that may affect their destiny in eternity.

Christians that have no problem serving the homosexual community in Biblical customs - specifically weddings that is clearly spelled out in the Bible as marriage between one man and one woman - will have to deal with themselves on how they did not follow the pattern God laid out, and deal with any kind of wordly fallout that may result from it.

The judgement seat of Christ, which we know is a feast for believers only, will give or withhold rewards in eternity. This issue could probably effect that standing, IMHO, based on Biblical scriptures.

I think the attempted law was way over kill. They should have just specified something like "specific instances of business owners or models that deal in weddings or marriage ceremonies (cakes, catering, outfitting, florists, photographers, etc.), do not have to contradict their personal, moral, or religious beliefs and serve those that demand such contradictions, and without fear of legal repercussions or intimidation by others".

Something like that.

 

[Larry Gude]

You are obviously taking my post out of context. Please try to separate how I feel about Christians behaving this way and how I feel about individual liberty. My personal feelings on this do not trump individual liberty.

Please re-read my post #43

 

[Larry Gude]

If the people decide to elect a government that places such limits on a person’s ability to run their own business, then (as my siggy says) “you get the government you deserve”. These things open the door for the government, at any level, dictating how your business gets run. Again, I’d rather the market dictate these things. I think these things end up naturally solving themselves.

Limits???? If I understand this correctly, a business that sells cakes to people who want to buy them will sell more cakes than a business that doesn't sell cakes to people who want to buy them. But, then, I was never a business major.

 

[Merlin99]

Limits???? If I understand this correctly, a business that sells cakes to people who want to buy them will sell more cakes than a business that doesn't sell cakes to people who want to buy them. But, then, I was never a business major.

Which is how it should work, the market deciding the issue instead of the government.

 

[PsyOps]

If you are, you're way off base. I was asserting nothing such, and don't see how you came to that conclusion. Once you are saved, always saved. Salvation, confessed by one through the work of Christ by his death, burial, and resurrection and ascension, is a done deal.

I was simply asserting that once one has determined a path to follow, i.e. - the Bible or not - they have made a choice that may affect their destiny in eternity.

Christians that have no problem serving the homosexual community in Biblical customs - specifically weddings that is clearly spelled out in the Bible as marriage between one man and one woman - will have to deal with themselves on how they did not follow the pattern God laid out, and deal with any kind of wordly fallout that may result from it.

The judgement seat of Christ, which we know is a feast for believers only, will give or withhold rewards in eternity. This issue could probably effect that standing, IMHO, based on Biblical scriptures.

I think the attempted law was way over kill. They should have just specified something like "specific instances of business owners or models that deal in weddings or marriage ceremonies (cakes, catering, outfitting, florists, photographers, etc.), do not have to contradict their personal, moral, or religious beliefs and serve those that demand such contradictions, and without fear of legal repercussions or intimidation by others".

Something like that.

I wasn’t coming to that conclusion… I was just trying to understand your point. You clarified it. Thank you.

 

[hotcoffee]

Now here's a question.... how does the shop owner know the person is a homosexual?

 

[Larry Gude]

Which is how it should work, the market deciding the issue instead of the government.

But, is it really much of an intrusion to say 'serve all'? Isn't it more of an intrusion to say 'you must meet these health standards, these building code standards' and so on and so on? By your reasoning, you're saying let them run a filthy place out of a clapboard building, drawing water from the creek if they so choose and let the market decide, correct? That's what I mean by liberty not being anarchy; rather basic rules that, in practice, really don't impede all that much but DO provide a basic promotion of the common welfare. Good Lord, Ronald Reagan signed into law Thou SHALT provide service and product even to those who can't pay with the Emergency Medical Treatment Act. That means black, white, male, female, criminal, leper, gay, straight, fat or ugly. Thou SHALL. And here we have people who actually are crying about 'having' to sell a cake to a couple of gay folks???

Like I say, the issue here, to me, is one of harming that which you (generic you) seek to protect.

 

[PsyOps]

Now here's a question.... how does the shop owner know the person is a homosexual?

They announced it? That's the thing that kind of bugs me about the gay community... they feel a need to announce who they are, when most folks don't care.

 

[Larry Gude]

Now here's a question.... how does the shop owner know the person is a homosexual?

...or an adulterer, or a gambler or a profane person or disrespectful to their parents or maker of graven images or works on Sundays or an embezzler or is bearing false witness against his neighbor or...

 

[Larry Gude]

If you are, you're way off base. I was asserting nothing such, and don't see how you came to that conclusion. Once you are saved, always saved. Salvation, confessed by one through the work of Christ by his death, burial, and resurrection and ascension, is a done deal.

...

The judgement seat of Christ, which we know is a feast for believers only, will give or withhold rewards in eternity. This issue could probably effect that standing, IMHO, based on Biblical scriptures.

.

I read that is potentially putting ones salvation at risk which was Psy's point.

There is no way in hell I can deal with a God who takes a wonderful, faithful, sincere person and sends them to purgatory because they sold some flowers or a cake to Bob and Bobby for their special party. This is absurd and it hurts the faith and there is no good reason for it. It makes sincere Christians looks like very silly people and does nothing more than help the godless heathens. I think America is a better place with Christianity as part of the society, respected, considered. Not as some sort of silly set of beliefs that takes issues with who sells a cake to whom because it means you'll go to hell.

 

[aps45819]

Now here's a question.... how does the shop owner know the person is a homosexual?

When they tell you or when they buy two grooms or two brides for the cake topping

 

[aps45819]

I read that is potentially putting ones salvation at risk which was Psy's point.

There is no way in hell I can deal with a God who takes a wonderful, faithful, sincere person and sends them to purgatory because they sold some flowers or a cake to Bob and Bobby for their special party. This is absurd and it hurts the faith and there is no good reason for it. It makes sincere Christians looks like very silly people and does nothing more than help the godless heathens. I think America is a better place with Christianity as part of the society, respected, considered. Not as some sort of silly set of beliefs that takes issues with who sells a cake to whom because it means you'll go to hell.

because you're allowed to believe whatever ever you want so why can't somebody else?

 

[Larry Gude]

because you're allowed to believe whatever ever you want so why can't somebody else?

They absolutely can. All I am pointing out is the results which are poor if you'd like Christianity to hold a strong place in our culture.

It's like the Dixie Chicks; you can say what you like. And people can speak back for saying things that sound silly.

 

[PsyOps]

They absolutely can. All I am pointing out is the results which are poor if you'd like Christianity to hold a strong place in our culture.

It's like the Dixie Chicks; you can say what you like. And people can speak back for saying things that sound silly.

And we didn't need a law to punish the DCs for their stupid antics. They suffered through the market when people stopped buying their stuff.

 

[b23hqb]

I read that is potentially putting ones salvation at risk which was Psy's point.

There is no way in hell I can deal with a God who takes a wonderful, faithful, sincere person and sends them to purgatory because they sold some flowers or a cake to Bob and Bobby for their special party. This is absurd and it hurts the faith and there is no good reason for it. It makes sincere Christians looks like very silly people and does nothing more than help the godless heathens. I think America is a better place with Christianity as part of the society, respected, considered. Not as some sort of silly set of beliefs that takes issues with who sells a cake to whom because it means you'll go to hell.

You left out a rather large part of my post 46 you just partially quoted:

"Christians that have no problem serving the homosexual community in Biblical customs - specifically weddings that is clearly laid out in the Bible as marriage between one man and one woman - will have to deal with themselves on how they did not follow the pattern God laid out, and deal with any kind of wordly fallout that may result from it.

The judgement seat of Christ, which we know is a feast for believers only, will give or withhold rewards in eternity. This issue could probably effect that standing, IMHO, based on Biblical scriptures.

I think the attempted law was way over kill. They should have just specified something like "specific instances of business owners or models that deal in weddings or marriage ceremonies (cakes, catering, outfitting, florists, photographers, etc.), do not have to contradict their personal, moral, or religious beliefs and serve those that demand such contradictions, and without fear of legal repercussions or intimidation by others".

Something like that. "

You really did not read, misread, or selectively cut & pasted my post. Purgatory? Trying to set Christianity as "some sort of silly set of beliefs that takes issues with who sells a cake to whom because it means you'll go to hell."?

I think you just cannot deal with a God whose written Word differs from your personal feelings. You are trying to put God into a box where the sides will just hold in what you want to believe or the way you want it to be - like your consistent assertions that the village or the societal whole takes precedent over individual religious beliefs. The rest is just religious jibberish and poppycock.

My feelings: If a person announces they are a homosexual and wants to purchase the proverbial birthday cake for someone, I don't think any baker, Christian or not, would have a problem with that, because birthdays, graduation type cakes and celebrations do not have any type of religious belief system.

However, for any kind of anything for a Biblical ritual or ceremony that goes against Biblical teachings in supporting practicing sin, no one should be compelled to meet those demands that violate their belief principles, by any village, society, or state. And no one should be made to suffer legal or intimidation practices/repercussions from any group or state for standing up to their beliefs.

Don't believe what I say about what the Bible preaches - check it out for yourself about what God says about homosexuality and how believers are to react to and associate with those that practice it. Romans 1:18-32 is a bedrock place to start in seeing what God has allowed mankind to degenerate into, not His will, but the desires of man to rule himself.