"If selling a wedding cake to a gay couple means the "Christian" baker participated?"

[Edward]

I am sorta with you on the whole unfair question thing, in a way. I would have taken it to the bottom of the rabbit hole so it could go no further. Was Paul or any other mature believer participating in and/or supporting sacrifice to idols by eating the meat sacrificed to them? The question of course is rhetorical, the answer was no. But to the weaker in faith the answer was yes.

Make no mistake, the gay couple are having a wedding. They are not concerned with God's plan or idea for a marriage as they do not know God. A mature believer that was a baker could easily find a way to share the gospel over such an event. An immature believer is going to freak out. It's all a matter of conscience, but this is one case where the more mature are wishing people would just grow up.

That's a pretty darn good point Brother. But their likely too busy at the cake shop to be pursuing the ministry to that extent. If they weren't ready to evangelize the event then it's prolly best that they did not. But to be there (not evangelizing) it would be merely...helping to prepare the festivities for an event which is an abomination to God...and was probably going to take place in a house of God somewhere! No way would I take that job.

They'd be expecting me to walk into the house of God and serve up one of my best cakes to a group of people who are offending God at the moment from their choice of festivity...join in and make it and serve it up for them? In God's house even? That is downright scary.

There is a warning story in scripture. It's in Acts 5:1-11 and it's the story of when Ananias and Sapphira offended God by lying and holding back money. I know it's a different situation, but the warning is clear. They both fell down dead in church. God hasn't been showing himself too much for the last couple thousand years, but now that we're in the end times...He's already started showing Himself more and more everywhere. Churches, homes, private visitations. The point is, I believe this type of stuff (people dying in church) is going to come back to the mainstream at some point...!!!!

Jesus said that He's coming back for a spotless Bride...Well? Is the church spotless right now? No! The church needs help and we all know it. Oh, He will come for His spotless Bride, and she will be spotless...and He is going to make sure of that. He is going to bring back into the church, the Fear of God, Purity and Reverence. I'll leave it to your imagination how He will accomplish this, but back back in NT days...people were dying in church.
(I try to walk softly in His House.)

 

[Northman]

But their likely too busy at the cake shop to be pursuing the ministry to that extent. If they weren't ready to evangelize the event then it's prolly best that they did not.

I don't know. Even working in industry where you get to keep your head down and not have to talk to people, there was always time to speak to a customer or customer representative. According to 1 Peter 3:15, we always have to be ready. As you know, there are certain things you can do with your body language to make someone ask you "What?". This is opportunity and it doesn't have to be done in a "I'm not baking that freakin cake, you can't tell me what to do!" way.

But to be there (not evangelizing) it would be merely...helping to prepare the festivities for an event which is an abomination to God...and was probably going to take place in a house of God somewhere! No way would I take that job.

They'd be expecting me to walk into the house of God and serve up one of my best cakes to a group of people who are offending God at the moment from their choice of festivity...join in and make it and serve it up for them? In God's house even? That is downright scary.

I think that if this was all that was involved, there wouldn't be anything going to court.
I could just see the court case....
Judge - You have been accused of a whack of discrimination, how do you plead.
Baker - Not guilty your honour.
Both sides BS a bit...
One lawyer - What makes you feel you didn't have to bake a cake for this (gay)couple?
Baker - Oh that wasn't the problem, the problem was when they expected me to stand beside the cake I made for them at their reception. I do deliver my products but I will not stand there and watch an event and serve that cake. That is an unpaid waste of my time. I need to be back at my shop making more cakes.
Judge - case dismissed

There is a warning story in scripture. It's in Acts 5:1-11 and it's the story of when Ananias and Sapphira offended God by lying and holding back money. I know it's a different situation, but the warning is clear. They both fell down dead in church.

I hear what you are saying ,but these people being dealt with are not believers and God isn't going to strike them dead.

Jesus said that He's coming back for a spotless Bride...Well? Is the church spotless right now? No! The church needs help and we all know it. Oh, He will come for His spotless Bride, and she will be spotless...and He is going to make sure of that. He is going to bring back into the church, the Fear of God, Purity and Reverence. I'll leave it to your imagination how He will accomplish this, but back back in NT days...people were dying in church.
(I try to walk softly in His House.)

We probably think a bit differently on this. I don't think the spotlessness can even be achieved this side of life. An apostle claimed to be chief sinner 1 Timothy 1:15, and another saying that if we claim to have no sin then the truth is not in us 1 John 1:8. I do believe He makes us spotless in that twinkling of an eye 1 Corinthians 15:52.

 

[Edward]

I don't know. Even working in industry where you get to keep your head down and not have to talk to people, there was always time to speak to a customer or customer representative. According to 1 Peter 3:15, we always have to be ready. As you know, there are certain things you can do with your body language to make someone ask you "What?". This is opportunity and it doesn't have to be done in a "I'm not baking that freakin cake, you can't tell me what to do!" way.

I'm guessing that they did not do it like that. They were prolly polite about it and turned them down...which prolly offended the gay couple, so in retaliation they prolly tried to make trouble for the guy. I do agree with you that we are to be ready with an answer about our faith and so forth, but I seriously doubt that any gay people or gay sympathizers at that event would be going to the bakers to ask for spiritual advice about anything during their gay wedding.

What in the world are gay people doing anyway, seeking to somehow legitimize an unholy relationship with a marriage covenant that God made for normal heterosexual people to enter into? They want to give the appearance of attaching God's blessing and name upon something that scripture says is an abomination to Him! How is that even possible?

I think that if this was all that was involved, there wouldn't be anything going to court.
I could just see the court case....
Judge - You have been accused of a whack of discrimination, how do you plead.
Baker - Not guilty your honour.
Both sides BS a bit...
One lawyer - What makes you feel you didn't have to bake a cake for this (gay)couple?
Baker - Oh that wasn't the problem, the problem was when they expected me to stand beside the cake I made for them at their reception. I do deliver my products but I will not stand there and watch an event and serve that cake. That is an unpaid waste of my time. I need to be back at my shop making more cakes.
Judge - case dismissed

It shouldn't be in court. And in the same way, that, the baker should not be like, I aint bakin it and you can't make me...!!! so also should the gay couple not be like, hey you can't turn us down and not make it for us because we're gay! You have to make it!! That's just stupid. Apparently that's what happened though. Acting like children.

I hear what you are saying ,but these people being dealt with are not believers and God isn't going to strike them dead.

Nobody knows for sure at this point Brother. God surprises us sometimes. He's struck bad guys down before. Plus...if the gay non-believers are wanting to have their marriage ceremony done in a church for any reason...I would think that all bets are off at that point. That is God's house and if they don't believe...then why are they trying to get married there? What business hath a non believer in the house of God. Even the money changers that Jesus drove out of the temple, were not doing abominations, they were merely making some coin, and He got mad at that! It wouldn't surprise me a bit to see God strike someone down in a church sometime, especially at a gay wedding or something! Wow.

We probably think a bit differently on this. I don't think the spotlessness can even be achieved this side of life. An apostle claimed to be chief sinner 1 Timothy 1:15, and another saying that if we claim to have no sin then the truth is not in us 1 John 1:8. I do believe He makes us spotless in that twinkling of an eye 1 Corinthians 15:52.

Hmm, perhaps. I dunno. Jesus became man and did it. And He told us, that, in Christ, all things are possible. And we do know that the sanctification process is ongoing and does take time, so I'm not convinced that all that happens in the twinkling of an eye later on...while it does say that no one is without sin, and that is true, it also says...be ye holy, even as I am holy...so the effort has to be there it seems to me. There would be a difference between a man trying and making mistakes, vs, a man not trying and living a life of pattern sin because he looked to the future for someone else to do this to him rather than try to be this himself (with God's help) even now. If we're saved and it's for eternity for us...then hasn't eternity already begun for us?

 

[Northman]

I'm guessing that they did not do it like that. They were prolly polite about it and turned them down...which prolly offended the gay couple, so in retaliation they prolly tried to make trouble for the guy. I do agree with you that we are to be ready with an answer about our faith and so forth, but I seriously doubt that any gay people or gay sympathizers at that event would be going to the bakers to ask for spiritual advice about anything during their gay wedding.

I guess anything about the encounter can be speculated. Nobody but them know exactly how things were said and done. The thing is though, even in the worst case scenario a mature believer can come out of something like that with a serving smile on his face while offering kind words of well-wishing AND making the cake while the other party can literally be frothing at the mouth. If they were properly witnessed to it wouldn't matter if they had spiritual advice questions or not, the matter is now between them and God.

What in the world are gay people doing anyway, seeking to somehow legitimize an unholy relationship with a marriage covenant that God made for normal heterosexual people to enter into? They want to give the appearance of attaching God's blessing and name upon something that scripture says is an abomination to Him! How is that even possible?

This is probably the area of the least understanding out there. The thing you and I know as marriage laid out by God and all the accounts we can read of it going back to the very first man and woman, isn't what the world knows about marriage. In most cultures and most of the worlds population throughout all time including today, the joining of man and woman or man and man have nothing to the blessing of God or even acknowledge His existence. They don't know and don't care. In 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 you can read that these people aren't even supposed to be subject to rules for those in the church concerning sexual immorality.

It shouldn't be in court. And in the same way, that, the baker should not be like, I aint bakin it and you can't make me...!!! so also should the gay couple not be like, hey you can't turn us down and not make it for us because we're gay! You have to make it!! That's just stupid. Apparently that's what happened though. Acting like children.

In an ideal world it wouldn't be in court. The world doesn't follow God though and it never has. This has more to do with domination and the flesh than anything else.

Hmm, perhaps. I dunno. Jesus became man and did it.

I think the whole concept is that He was the only one actually able to do it. Nobody else had a chance.

And He told us, that, in Christ, all things are possible.

It was a response to a specific question though concerning being actually saved, while not being perfect.

And we do know that the sanctification process is ongoing and does take time, so I'm not convinced that all that happens in the twinkling of an eye later on...while it does say that no one is without sin, and that is true, it also says...be ye holy, even as I am holy...so the effort has to be there it seems to me.

I am in 100% agreement with you about the effort business. And yes, sanctification is an ongoing process. The thing is though, if we are not without sin, it never ends here. As in we never complete it. If there has to be a continuation of sanctification after death then you move into the realm of ideas and all of a sudden concepts like purgatory become a reality. And since there is no scripture to support those ideas I would use one of Reba's quotes in response to that and say "so the blood of Christ wasn't enough?" Hebrews 10:14.

If we're saved and it's for eternity for us...then hasn't eternity already begun for us?

Philosophically I would agree with you, but there will be a point when all the pain and death gone and former things(whatever that actually encompasses) don't even come to mind.

The whole point is that too many people listen to teachers that are NOT elder men of peace. The actions of this guy is a play by play of how Paul describes a brother weaker in faith 1 Corinthians 10:23-30. While I totally feel bad for the guy, and even though doing what he is doing wouldn't change the fact that he is welcome at my table for brew and smoked bird, the actions themselves are not of a mature believer. It basically means he isn't ready to teach or be followed.

 

[Mike]

Make sense?

I suppose some of it does, but I disagree.

The scripture you just gave is a good one to establish differences. Another good set is 1 Corinthians 10:23-32.

I guess I could see how you'd use the Hebrews verses I quoted to make your point, but I don't see it. While protests never really work, like when a Christian group ceases buying Disney merchandise, I believe it can be a mature believer's response in the very small way they have the ability to send a message.

I have no idea how you can use that Corinthians text to make your point. I really don't think Paul had homosexuality in mind when he said all things are lawful. In fact, I dare say I know he didn't.

Gay non-believers are under 1 Corinthians 5:9-13.

While I agree that we shouldn't judge non-believers, I do believe we should not condone their hedonistic behavior or even tacitly send a message that it's all good. I agree that we should reserve our judgment for believers who should know what God's desire for us is, but we shouldn't stand by and do nothing while the world burns.

 

[Northman]

I guess I could see how you'd use the Hebrews verses I quoted to make your point, but I don't see it. While protests never really work, like when a Christian group ceases buying Disney merchandise, I believe it can be a mature believer's response in the very small way they have the ability to send a message.

I said they were good to establish that there are differences between the two. It did help the point I was using it for as the Hebrews verses in question do exactly that, describe differences. I have no idea how anyone else wanted to use it and what point they wanted to make with it.

I have no idea how you can use that Corinthians text to make your point. I really don't think Paul had homosexuality in mind when he said all things are lawful. In fact, I dare say I know he didn't.

The point in these Corinthian verses in book 10 starts at verse 27, it shows someone wrecking the meal of someone strong faith. That is what I am describing as the actions of the baker. In the context of how Paul used them, it was lawful for him to eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Paul didn't consider that partaking in an abomination or supporting killing animals for false gods. The people who did this the sacrifice, guilty of sin. Those eating the meat to gain power from their god, guilty of sin. The believer having a plate of that meat knowing it's all BS, not guilty of sin. When you skip back to the Corinthians 5 bit, it is most definitely speaking of sexual immorality, especially within the church, but I would never claim that activity to be lawful. Not sure where that came from. Those verses were only really used to establish we can't make rules for them.

While I agree that we shouldn't judge non-believers, I do believe we should not condone their hedonistic behavior or even tacitly send a message that it's all good. I agree that we should reserve our judgment for believers who should know what God's desire for us is, but we shouldn't stand by and do nothing while the world burns.

I've never been of a different opinion. Telling them and letting them make their own pick is the only way it can happen though, and even that needs to be done with zero attitude 1 Corinthians 10:32-33.