Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity

Yes, I know that you try to sweep the distinctions under the carpet. But that doesn't mean that they aren't there or aren't important. Legally a clear-cut case of discrimination against gays is far less of a marginal decision than refusing to ice a slogan in favour of gay marriage.

She ignored it I see. Big shock!And to think that this is a specific case of something God said was o.k. to do.When Frako brought up the Law of Moses and things outlawed (post 2), Faith claimed this:

quote:

---

Faith [post 5]

​

Oh yeah, we have to hear about that old canard again too.
That's one of the laws specifically given to Israel and nobody else to teach them spiritual truths and to set them apart from the heathen nations. They apply to nobody but ancient Israel. Other laws were fulfilled by Christ.

---

So Faith dismissed the OLD "laws" in post 5.She also ignored newer Post Easter commands except older threads saw her say they were outdated and obsolete (I documented that fact but she ignored my post). Acts 15 and 21.Now she ignores the old laws saying sinful things can be sold to non-Jews. (the Deut. 14:21 meat issue might of had to do with the fact that an animal was killed by a non human so it already was killed in an inhumane way, but Faith doesn't care as it won't fit her arguments)It's amazing that this is literally the only verse that comes close to enlightening us as to what "God" really thinks about selling products that lead to sinful behavior.Faith ignores it!

quote:

---

Yes, I know that you try to sweep the distinctions under the carpet. But that doesn't mean that they aren't there or aren't important. Legally a clear-cut case of discrimination against gays is far less of a marginal decision than refusing to ice a slogan in favour of gay marriage.

---

I noticed that you have been trying to get Faith to back up her claims with scripture. (in past posts, but I have been too busy to read the newer posts)Good luck on that one!It is tough to debate somebody who feels she can ignore anything scriptural she wants to.Her Orthodox tradition (based on the Imperial Church theocracy of the 4th century on) says gay marriage should be illegal so to hell with scripture as far as Faith is concerned.This issue was decided by Rome (Faith calls Rome "God" mind you) so it is settled.Ask her about the Trinity.Same response.Scripture will be ignored or brushed aside quickly.

Notice Faith hasn't addressed the Deuteronomy 14:21 issue. (I am guessing so, but I haven't had time to read all the latest posts)Get a clue folks!Honestly.Also, I need to edit something I said.
I said, in post 347, that "It's amazing that this is literally the only verse that comes close to enlightening us as to what "God" really thinks about selling products that lead to sinful behavior."I still think that Paul saying all things are "lawful" might be worth our consideration since nomos could very possibly refer to the Roman laws that all homosexual conduct including marriage.Faith swept that one away pretty quickly.

quote:

---

Nomos - Wikipedia
Nomos - Wikipedia
Nomos or Nomoi may refer to: from the Greek term for "law It is the origin of the
suffix -onomy, as in astronomy, economy, or taxonomy. custom, traditional social
...
Cached

​

Nomos (mythology) - Wikipedia
Nomos - Wikipedia(mythology)
In ancient Greek religion Nomos is the daemon of laws, statutes, and ordinances.
By one account, Nomos' wife is Eusebia (Piety), and their daughter is Dike ...
Cached

​

Nomos (sociology) - Wikipedia
Nomos - Wikipedia(sociology)
In sociology, nomos refers to provisional codes (habits or customs) of social and
political behavior, socially constructed and historically (even geographically)
specific. The term derives from the Greek νόμος, and it refers not only to explicit
laws ...
Cached

​

Strong's Greek: 3551. νόμος (nomos) -- that which is assigned ...
Strong's Greek: 3551. (nomos) -- that which is assigned, hence usage, law
3551 nmos — law. 3551 (nmos) is used of: a) the Law (Scripture), with
emphasis on the first five books of Scripture; or b) any system of religious thinking
...
Cached

​

nomos | Greek philosophy | Britannica.com
nomos | Greek philosophy | Britannica
Jul 20, 1998 ... Nomos, ( Greek: law, or custom, ) plural Nomoi, in law, the concept of law in
ancient Greek philosophy. The problems of political authority ...
Cached

​

Nomos - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard
Nomos Meaning in Bible - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard
Learn about Nomos original meaning using the New Testament Greek ...
anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command.

---

Has she addressed Deut 14:21 yet?Don't let her get away with ignoring this one.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

I'm happy to agree that it's a person's conscience and I'm not suggesting a person be forced to act against their conscience, but I still don't see how the wedding cake baking and selling procedure is the same as treating the marriage as legitimate.Do you agree, at least, that your right to life takes precedence over my religious right to sacrifice you to my gods? Since the bakers are happy to sell other products one option is for them to stop selling the products that put them into moral difficulties.Or, if a civil partnership that is called a marriage is a problem and this is all about what people are calling things, and Christians don't have a right to tell people what they choose to call things - why don't the Christian bakers stop selling wedding cakes but sell 'celebration cakes'. If the people buying the cakes choose to celebrate sinful things that's up to them, but the bakers aren't legitimizing anything by calling it a wedding themselves, only acknowledging the right for people to celebrate in a free fashion. Yes, as we often are. And that's the point. There are many sins, but Christians seem to be primarily focussed on complaining and being difficult about homosexuality considerably more. I seldom hear about Christians refusing people that get drunk a little too much, adulterers, the effeminate (unless they are overtly trans). Do Christian bakers also refuse Muslim wedding cakes? Atheist Wedding cakes? Do they ever check to make sure they aren't accidentally condoning any other sin? Isn't everybody a sinner and so shouldn't they refuse wedding cakes to everybody? And thus, it seems that there is some particular animus against gays.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

So legitimizing an occasion which intrinsically rejects Jesus as God and the only Way is OK? I should remind you that Eid involves chanting 'Allāhu Akbar' A festival created by Mohammed etc etc.

For some reason it doesn't hit me as a matter of conscience though. Maybe something like that teaching about eating meat sacrificed to idols -- it's meaningless because idols are nothing. Ramadan is nothing, Mohammed was a deceived person. Something like that. If I think of a clearer way of saying it I will, but at the moment in my mind it's nothing more than a food recipe.Whereas gay marriage is a violation of God's marriage ordinance.Second thought: However, as in the passage about meat sacrificed to idols, if my making food for such a festival was a matter of conscience for somebody else I would have to say no to it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's cool - and I agree with you.The reason all of this gay marriage thing puzzles me, is that whilst there is a pretty clear ordinance against worshipping other gods in the Bible - eg Exodus 34:14 "For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God" - it's ok to bake a cake for another god's religious festival. But not for a gay couple's secular marriage.To me, baking a cake for another god's festival is at least as much a contradiction to a Christian's Biblical commands, as baking a cake for someone else's secular gay marriage (to the extent that either are. I happen to think that neither is that big an affront).I'm afraid I can't help but feel that religious consciences are being cited in support of a particular prejudice, but are not brought up when it comes to another potential prejudice.

Yes I see the problem, but it's just a matter of not knowing how to put it into words any more clearly than I have. I "feel" it as a matter of conscience or not, I've tried to say why, but I've run out of ways.

In which case I'll remind you that any principles you manage to establish while you have the power to do so, can and will be used against you when you lack the power. Meaning Christians may one day be the ones being victimized by the notion of refusing on the grounds of conscience: "Sorry I don't sell guns to Christians as it violates my conscience" or something like that.

What can I say. It's about the definition of the institution of marriage in the case of gay marriage. A wedding cake is specifically symbolic of a wedding. I don't see anything specific about some kind of food for a festival of a false god. I understand that you do. But only a Christian actually feels the sting of conscience about gay marriage, you don't so you're left ibtellectually supposing things about it without any real idea of what it's about. To you it's all fiction starting with belief in God, all of it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Could happen. But conscience isn't a mere "principle," it's a sense of God's mind and heart, not something "established" or subject to alteration by mere thought.

Somehow I don't feel making food for the people implicates me in their beliefs. Perhaps with more of a sense of it or some experience of it that would change.

Which is really the most likely thing that will happen. Sad for those who feel they have a sort of calling for making wedding cakes, which Melissa Klein (the Oregon bakery) does. Along comes this law out of the blue that deprives them of that loved expression.As far as the idea of "celebration cakes" goes, I don't think Christians want to have anything to do with anything even remotely like a wedding of homosexuals. If you want to buy a fancy cake for your celebration just don't iinvolve the bakers in its purpose. As I said, I think it's because so much has been made about gay rights in the last decade or so, and particularly gay marriage. If all that weren't happening Christians wouldn't have any need to make a particular issue of homosexuality. Then let me remind you that the subject is gay marriage, not the sin of homosexuality as such or any other sin, just the fact that marriage is for a man and a woman and not two of the same sex. It's not about the persons, it's about what marriage is for, the union of male with female, nothing else. Again, it's not about sin, it's about what marriage is for, the union of male and female. See above. It's not about sin, it's about the purpose of marriage, which is the union of male and female.But this is really changing the subject. I'd said something about the importance of salvation which you said focused too much on homosexuals. Then you switched back to the topic of gay marriage. Salvation is about sin, repentance, being saved FROM sin. But gay marriage is a violation of the purpose of marriage which is the union of male and female and not about sin as such. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Which is really the most likely thing that will happen. Sad for those who feel they have a sort of calling for making wedding cakes, which Melissa Klein (the Oregon bakery) does. Along comes this law out of the blue that deprives them of that loved expression.

---

I don't think that a law that was in place before she even started her business can be described as "coming out of the blue".

quote:

---

As I said, I think it's because so much has been made about gay rights in the last decade or so, and particularly gay marriage. If all that weren't happening Christians wouldn't have any need to make a particular issue of homosexuality.

---

And again we see that the REAL issue is fighting against gay rights.

quote:

---

Then let me remind you that the subject is gay marriage, not the sin of homosexuality as such or any other sin, just the fact that marriage is for a man and a woman and not two of the same sex.

---

And yet the idea that homosexuality is a sin is a major part of your argument. In fact it's the only bit that stands up to examination.You haven't given one valid reason why you should object to homosexuals getting the legal benefits associated with marriage.Complaining that secular society uses a different definition of marriage to you or that the Supreme Court defied your will is not very Christian nor is it very sensible.