Megachurch pastor rejects his father’s bigotry: Jesus would want you to bake a gay wedding cake

[Zaac]

Oh! Oh! Oh! Why didn't I think of this earlier?

You mean in my heart I can think any nonwhite individual a stupid, subhuman ape, and bear all kinds of ill will and contempt for him, and it isn't sin unless I ACT on it?

Oh!Oh!Oh! Mr. GotchaYou just acknowledged an act. And contrary to your act, Scripture says but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.

 

[Zaac]

Affections are acts. Thoughts are acts. To lust after a woman is to commit adultery. To be angry without cause is to murder.

Same sex attractions are corrupt attractions.

That would be YOUR opinion. There is nowhere in Scripture that God says simple attraction is sinful. I'm attracted to other men of God because I'm drawn to the Jesus Christ in them. Is that corrupt?

Little kids are usually attracted to the same sex because they have more interests in common with the same sex than they do with the opposite sex.

Does that mean that the little girl who thinks boys are icky and all her friends are little girls who like to play with Barbies has corrupt attractions?

Nope. She's attracted to something in them that they have in common.

Shoot, you're attracted to Donald Trump because yall share similar philosophies

Sexuality is in a large part conditioned.

We weren't talking about sexuality. We were talking about same sex ATTRACTION.

There is no such thing as a heterosexual or a homosexual. For that matter, there is no such thing as a pedophile. The terms and identities were invented in just the last century. A homosexual was one who had unnatural and deviant appetites for members of the same sex, and a heterosexual was one who had unnatural and deviant appetites for members of the opposite sex.

You can deny they exist all you want. The concepts of certain acts exist in Scripture, and if someone just happened to add a term to them today, it doesn't make the act any less real.

Whether by humanist standards an act is heterosexual or homosexual, it is still sodomy. Bill Clinton, Monica Lewinsky and cigars in the Oval Office is a prime example.

So...

But to say that one is a homosexual is to lie and to illegitimately ban him from the natural remedies for lusts that are effected in marriage.

You can call them whatever you want, but you don't get to create sin.

Paul said it is better to marry than to burn with lust.

Lust is a sin. If you identify as a heterosexual or a homosexual and you lust, the sin is lusting. It is NOT you identifying as having same sex or opposite sex attraction.

 

[Zaac]

How do we leave the One who saved us from our sins - including the sin of homosexuality - out of our discussion of homosexuality and gay marriage? Every single thing I do is based in my faith and if I choose to not participate in sin, I absolutely am going to point to Jesus as to why I cannot do it.

Not who that was for ann, but it wasn't my quote on which you commented.

 

[JonC]

Yes, Jesus would attend one. Jesus was continually accused by those who did not like him of eating and drinking with sinners. Also he talked with the totally unacceptable, the leper and the Samaritan woman. The only people he came down hard on were the self-righteous, legalistic conservatives of his day.

I agree. But just imagine the sermon when it came to the part "if anyone objects, let him speak now or forever hold his peace."

We are among sinners. We live among sin. But we do not take a part in sin.

I do not think it is wrong to bake a cake, build a house, sell a cruise ticket, etc. for one of those couples. I would not participate in the wedding, and I do not see providing a common public service as participating in that sin. But if I did, then I would refuse and not try to sue my way out of the consequences.

 

[Zaac]

No one refused to bake a cake because someone is gay. That is a complete untruth. The bakery had actually served this customer before happily. What they would not do is to make a cake for a gay wedding. BIG difference.

IMO, that just makes no sense.

Take this scenario:If I came in and said I want to order a cake that looks like

but didn't say it was a gay "wedding" cake, that would be okay, and the service would be provided? But the minute I say GAY "wedding" cake, suddenly you can't do it?

Why is it right that you, as a Christian, treat me and my desire for a cake differently than you treat the other sinners who come in to purchase a cake?

 

[Zaac]

I agree. But just imagine the sermon when it came to the part "if anyone objects, let him speak now or forever hold his peace."

Now THAT is the type of thing I foresaw. Jesus never did anything to just be doing it. He didn't go to the tax collector's house just to eat. He went to love on them and witness of Himself.

We are among sinners. We live among sin. But we do not take a part in sin.

Exactly.

I do not think it is wrong to bake a cake, build a house, sell a cruise ticket, etc. for one of those couples. I would not participate in the wedding, and I do not see providing a common public service as participating in that sin. But if I did, then I would refuse and not try to sue my way out of the consequences.

I'll even come to your wedding because I love you. But if you asked me to participate in it, I'd have to lovingly decline.

This is a sword that Christians should not be trying to die on.

Should I not rent a tux or limo or chairs and tables to a gay couple for their "wedding" if I'm in business to rent those things? That's ludicrous. A display of love can go a long way in softening people's hearts to be receptive of the Gospel.

 

[Rolfe]

I do not know about wedding cakes, but I could not bump a paying pair off a plane solely based on their lifestyle. That does not mean that I approve.

 

[Zaac]

Was He kind to pedophiles?

In accordance with Scripture,Jesus would have been kind to even the pedophile. For in the same way that people have stigmatized gay people to be the worst of the worst, pedophiles are pegged the same way. It doesn't lessen the heinousness of the sin committed. But Jesus seemed to make it a point to redeem those that people thought were beyond redemption in part to show us that His love does cover a multitude of sin. That doesn't mean that there aren't consequences. But I don't believe that Jesus would be any less loving to someone who had served time for child molestation than he would be for the tax collector.

 

[Alcott]

Why is it right that you, as a Christian, treat me and my desire for a cake differently than you treat the other sinners who come in to purchase a cake?

If you want that answered, then answer a question previously put to you: If a nazi comes in and orders a cake and says he wants a swastika in decorative frosting on top, would you make that for him?

 

[Zaac]

I do not know about wedding cakes, but I could not bump a paying pair off a plane solely based on their lifestyle. That does not mean that I approve.

Exactly. What would I look like , if I were a travel agent who just happened to be a Christian, and a gay couple came into my business to buy tickets for a plane and vacation package?

Shoot, y'all have a seat. I'll be right with you with our top destination packages and blackout dates. That doesn't mean I agree with a particular sin. I just sold some tickets. I didn't perform a " gay" wedding because Biblically there is no such thing.

 

[Zaac]

If you want that answered, then answer a question previously put to you: If a nazi comes in and order a cake and says he wants a swastika in decorative frosting on top, would you make that for him?

Nope.I make it a point not to cuss either. So if you ask me to place something obscene,crude or distasteful on the cake, I'll let you know, that I can make the cake for you, but I don't put stuff like that on the cakes. I would then give you the names of some other bakeries who may be willing to put what you want on the cake after I make it. I'm an Ephesians 5:4 type guy.

But just ain't anything obscene,crude or distasteful about making a cake for a gay "wedding" unless somebody is asking me to, again, stick something obscene, crude or distasteful on the cake.

I simply would not want to be known as a businessman who did stuff like that. I think the average person would respect that.

 

[Zaac]

If you want that answered, then answer a question previously put to you: If a nazi comes in and orders a cake and says he wants a swastika in decorative frosting on top, would you make that for him?

I answered your question. But there's a difference between baking a cake and baking a cake and sticking obscene, crude, or distasteful stuff on the cake.

That's not part of my business model.Biggrin

 

[InTheLight]

Exactly. What would I look like , if I were a travel agent who just happened to be a Christian, and a gay couple came into my business to buy tickets for a plane and vacation package?

Shoot, y'all have a seat. I'll be right with you with our top destination packages and blackout dates. That doesn't mean I agree with a particular sin. I just sold some tickets. I didn't perform a " gay" wedding because Biblically there is no such thing.

Wait a minute....

What if it's their honeymoon?

*Laff*

 

[Zaac]

Wait a minute....

What if it's their honeymoon?

*Laff*

I might give them a discount.

 

[Alcott]

Nope.I make it a point not to cuss either. So if you ask me to place something obscene,crude or distasteful on the cake, I'll let you know, that I can make the cake for you, but I don't put stuff like that on the cakes. I would then give you the names of some other bakeries who may be willing to put what you want on the cake after I make it. I'm an Ephesians 5:4 type guy.

But just ain't anything obscene,crude or distasteful about making a cake for a gay "wedding" unless somebody is asking me to, again, stick something obscene, crude or distasteful on the cake.

I simply would not want to be known as a businessman who did stuff like that. I think the average person would respect that.

You keep saying "gay wedding cake" as if there's nothing different about it than a 'regular' wedding cake. That may or may not be the case, as the buyer may want those little models of 2 grooms or 2 brides on top. If you normally place those models on top, are you going to do as they want, or would you stop placing those models on top of the cakes? I don't kn ow what else may go on them-- their names, a rainbow, or what. But that is crude and obscene to me, and I would not do it.Is it to you? And possibly saving a step here, if you say you would do that and it would not mean you personally are endorsing their sin, that leads to the question... why would you refuse to put a symbol of sin-- an "obscene symbol"-- on one cake but you would put a sin symbol on the other?

[Troy, this question is for you, too.]

 

[Zaac]

You keep saying "gay wedding cake" as if there's nothing different about it than a 'regular' wedding cake.

There isn't. I'm putting eggs and sugar and flour, baking powder, butter, and some vanilla and some milk in the gay "wedding" cake just as I will with the straight wedding cake.

That may or may not be the case, as the buyer may want those little models of 2 grooms or 2 brides on top.

Shoot, they come in lil plastic bags. I'll stick them on top for them. Or if they want, I'll hand them to them and say place whatever on top of your cake that you want. I might even throw in an extra bag or two and some extra frosting just in case they put the first two on wrong. They can stick a miniature Ferris Wheel on there for all I care. As long as it's not obscene, crude, or distasteful, I'll put it on there for them if it were my business.

If you as a cake baker don't want to put those lil figures on there, then don't. I'd still make the cake for them though. I just don't see a reason to make an issue about the lil figures if I'm gonna bake the cake.

If you normally place those models on top, are you going to do as they want, or would you stop placing those models on top of the cakes?

I don't have a problem with the lil figures. If that's what they want, go for it. They're gonna take them off anyhow.

I don't kn ow what else may go on them-- their names, a rainbow, or what. But that is crude and obscene to me, and I would not do it.

Do you in general find people's names and rainbows to be crude and obscene? Don't confuse bigotry with crude and obscene.

Is it to you? And possibly saving a step here, if you say you would do that and it would not mean you personally are endorsing their sin, that leads to the question... why would you refuse to put a symbol of sin-- an "obscene symbol"-- on one cake but you would put a sin symbol on the other?

What sin symbol? The two little men? And since when is pretending to get married a sin?

 

[preachinjesus]

In my reading of Jesus' teaching on this matter, it is clear, you bake the cake. Just like we go the extra mile when compelled by an imperialist Roman soldier, a Christian bakes the cake...you sell the groceries, you fill the flower order, you fix the tire.

Now, whether someone in the US should have to violate their conscious when suitable fulfillment it available in the same locality (i.e. another baker) is a different issue. But I don't think we're a Christian nation so...

 

[Alcott]

It is obviously no use going over the same details again, but there are some celebrations of sin you will take part in, and some you won't, as well as that you will promulgate some connotations thereof, while some you won't, while you think some suggestions of sin are obscene while some aren't. If you think you're exempt from having nothing to do with sin, or avoiding even the appearance of evil, that's just it-- you can't communicate on these topics other than by thinking that does not apply to you.

 

[Zaac]

It is obviously no use going over the same details again, but there are some celebrations of sin you will take part in, and some you won't, as well as that you will promulgate some connotations thereof, while some you won't, while you think some suggestions of sin are obscene while some aren't. If you think you're exempt from having nothing to do with sin, or avoiding even the appearance of evil, that's just it-- you can't communicate on these topics other than by thinking that does not apply to you.

You're right there's no need going over it again. You think what you want and create all the new sins you like. I'll choose to treat people with the love of Christ while attempting to obey the commands and principles that are already there.

 

[annsni]

Would you bake a cake for a NAMLA celebration?