Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity

Sins of the body have consequences IN THE BODY -- illness of some sort. That's all that means. It means sexual sins injure the body in some way. It does not mean that sins outside the body are not sins, but their consequences are also outside the body -- bad things happening to you in other ways.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Where did I say Paul wanted a theocracy?
That's ridiculous. Quote me, I need to see the context.You are continuing to accuse me of stuff you invented in your own head. I'm through with this nonsense.Unless you start making sense there's nothing more to say. It has nothing to do with the thread that I can see anyway.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Quote me. And provide a link.

PLEASE QUOTE ME. None of that makes any sense, but if you quote me maybe I'll at least recognize what I meant in context. If you are getting anything right at all, that is, and that is questionable.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Well, I could tell you were lost at sea on this subject, you weren't making any sense, but I tried my best to answer you clearly anyway. I don't know what your problem is but there is nothing bogus about the problem for Christians of making a wedding cake for a gay wedding and I have no idea why you think so.Why it should make a difference what the cultural expression of a wedding is I have NO idea. If the custom for weddings in some culture was meat pies I assume a biblical Christian in that culture would have to refuse to make meat pies for a gay wedding. If the custom was marching through the streets with sparklers I assume the Christian supplier of sparklers would have to refuse to sell them for a gay wedding.

Sorry,, your question makes absolutely no sense to me. I don't even get what the question is, but why you are asking it and what it has to do with this topic totally escape me. Sorry.

Seems to me the situation is very simple and all these side issues are irrelevant, if at least sometimes interesting, but in the end it all comes back to the situation as stated in the OP. If a [conservative Bible-believing] Christian is asked to provide a service for a gay wedding he/she has to refuse it, based on his/her understanding of God's definition of marriage given in the Bible, as between a man and a woman, which excludes two men or two women.ABE: Since some people seem to get stuck on literal wedding cakes, it may (or may not, sigh) be clarifying to repeat what I just wrote to nwr:If the custom for weddings in some culture was meat pies I assume a biblical Christian in that culture would have to refuse to make meat pies for a gay wedding. If the custom was marching through the streets with sparklers I assume the Christian supplier of sparklers would have to refuse to sell them for a gay wedding.ANY service for a gay wedding is a problem for a biblical Christian.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Your reading of the Bible is irrelevant. This is a problem for conservative Bible-believers and THEIR reading determines that they can't provide a service for a gay wedding.

I don't know Paul's opinions on what secular government should do, he never gives an opinion about such things. If I had to guess I'd say he has no opinion, secular government is entirely separate from Christian life, which it generally is when there is opposition between them as there was in the days of the Caesars.You hava to quote your references I don't know Leviticus 20:11 by heart.If you are talking about the incident in the Corinthian church of a man sleeping with his stepmother -- not his mother in law -- Paul told the church to excommunicate him, but then later he advised mercy on the man.But what is your question about that? And what does it have to do with this topic?

True. it's a very simple situation, not requiring all this hot air.

Christians are kind to everybody including sinners but we don't support sin itself, we don't treat sin as not-sin, we don't support violations of God's laws. Sorry. Misstatement. See Message 854Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Well, I put that wrong. It happens. It's not because of their sins it's because of God's ordinance of marriage. Violating that IS a sin but I should be more careful about the necessary distinctions. The objection is to gay marriage, not to gays, as has been said over and over. Nothing is denied to them except service for a wedding.We obey God and not man.Sorry.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We all arrived at this interpretation independently of each other, nobody is dictating it. I knew immiediately why the Kleins refused a wedding cake, why the florist refused to arrange flowers, the photographer to shoot a gay wedding. It didn't need to be explained to me. We know how to understand the Bible. There must be millions of us too, but unfortunately there are people who think they are Bible-believers who aren't so it's hard to know the numbers.

There is no "secular" issue here. If a band of armed LGBTs came to a conservative Bible-believing baker and demanded a wedding cake for a gay wedding the baker would have to say no to them same as to a law legalizing gay marriage. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No they should not marry.