Bakers refuse Gay wedding cake - update: Supreme Court rules in favour of Bakers

Christianity needs to come up with a new revision for it to be applicable to modern times in my opinion. Sort some of the nonsense out from stories written by different people 2000 years ago. Then religion might be taken a bit more seriously
 
jimjamuk said:
Christianity needs to come up with a new revision for it to be applicable to modern times in my opinion. Sort some of the nonsense out from stories written by different people 2000 years ago. Then religion might be taken a bit more seriously
Click to expand...

If it did that it wouldn't be Christianity would it because if you modernise Christ's teachings then they aren't Christ's teachings...
 
vincent1989 said:
Smile all you like, the bible is clear which laws are fulfilled and which aren't by the order in which they appear. Here's a chronology of sorts:

Oldest: mosiac law, no homo etc
Old: Christ's atonement fulfilling the old law
Slightly less old: no homo

Can't make it clearer than that really :D.
Click to expand...

basically a typical Christian who picks and chooses part of the bible he listens to and ignores the bits he doesn't like. nothing much more to understand.

For example, Jesus says in the Gospels:

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

And Jesus also said:

Luke 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void.


If you dont follow the old parts of the bible, and the old law, you are not a christian
 
Last edited:
I don't why you are wasting your time as sensible argument doesn't exist with religion. It's just a collection of stories 2000 years ago and for some people they haven't progressed since those days.

I'd rather read the stories of Hans Christian Anderson....
Click to expand...

What exactly is the point of this post? I don't see anybody trying to convert you, or anyone else, so how is this relevant?

The discussion on this thread (from what I can see) is about whether Christians should be accepting of homosexuality or regarding it as sinful (my view). This is an argument that only makes sense to be had by people who self-describe as Christians. If you think it's all a load of nonsense, then you have no purpose posting in this thread at all.
 
D.P. said:
The outcome they dreamed about was being able to walk into a baker's shop and order a cake without being discriminated against.
Click to expand...

they could have ordered a cake, it was a cake with a specific political message that was denied

Thekwango said:
'dear mr and mr gay couple, sorry we have a bit of bad news - we miscalculated the number of outstanding orders we have and in this instance won't be able to fulfil your order. apologies for any inconvenience caused - yours sincerely ashers non-homophobic bakery'

the above would have solved the bakeries issue without need for a court case, and everyone could move on with their lives! But no, everyone has to get all knicker twisted.
Click to expand...

but that is a complete lie and if mr and mrs gay couple then asked a friend to go in and order another custom cake then that lie would be revealed

what they could have perhaps done however is simply stated that

'while we're happy to serve anyone regardless of their race, religion or orientation I'm sorry to have to inform you that we have a policy of not printing cakes with any form of political message'


then they're no longer turning down that particular message (which the judge ruled was 'inextricably linked' to the customer's sexuality) but have got a blanket ban, which has nothing to do with sexual orientation, on *any* political messages on cakes. Given that they probably don't get too many political message requests they can then stick to that rule going forwards.
 
dalehitchy1 said:
basically a typical Christian who picks and chooses part of the bible he listens to. nothing much more to understand.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure but are you referring to yourself or someone else in the thread? I've backed up everything I've said with the bible, believe it or not that is what it says... you may not like it, you certainly don't have to adhere to it but that is what it says in fairly plain English.
 
ICDP said:
Lol, the logic fail is awesome here. They did not refuse service because the people ordering the cake were gay. They refused service because they did not like that the customer did not share their religious beliefs in relation to gay marriage. That is where the case of discrimination lay.

The fact the customer was gay is irrelevant yet it seems many posting here illogically make this the central theme.
Click to expand...

you've just agreed with the person you quoted who also pointed out that the fact the customer was gay isn't important :confused:
 
dalehitchy1 said:
basically a typical Christian who picks and chooses part of the bible he listens to and ignores the bits he doesn't like. nothing much more to understand.

For example, Jesus says in the Gospels:

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

And Jesus also said:

Luke 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one dot of the Law to become void.


If you dont follow the old parts of the bible, and the old law, you are not a christian
Click to expand...

All of which pre-dates the epistle to the Romans written by one of Christ's apostles who recorded Christ's other teachings such as the fulfilment of the mosiac law.
 
Woden said:
It wasn't written in English :p
Click to expand...

No, it was translated in to English at the behest of king James which was a fairly lengthy process accomplished by some of the most intelligent theologians and scholars of the day, some of whom were fluent in double digits different languages who would have known the common vernacular and how and when it would be appropriate who all reviewed each others work and made corrections as appropriate. The KJV is probably the first peer reviewed document in history.

Therefore it is in fairly plain English...

Ps I am aware the bible has been translated in to English a number of times before and since, the KJV is still regarded as the most accurate by anyone who doesn't subscribe to the codex sinaticus or vaticanus translations (which did not undergo the same strict translation process) but is the most widely read and purchased.
 
Last edited:
Pudney said:
Letters from St Augustine to St Jerome, around 400 AD.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102082.htm



That's another 1,550 years.
Click to expand...

On the contrary it's the 4th century where the doctrine of the Trinity really comes in to the forefront of Christian theological teaching.

Also just for some biblical backing:


John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 10:30 - I and [my] Father are one.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
 
D.P. said:
Exactly, they were discriminated against due to their desired message.
Click to expand...

And that is something I think should be allowed.

Shouldn't a baker, printer, t-shirt maker etc.. be able to decide which political messages they're going to support and object/refuse business from those they don't support.

Usually they can but I constructed an example earlier in the thread to illustrate the principle using something more people will object to.

(fictitious)* EDL gay wing wanting an 'EDL gay wing against homophobia in Islam' cake made by a Muslim baker...(with or without a picture of Mohamed on it)

Now normally printers etc.. do turn down political messages by extremist groups - however it seems from this ruling that if your political message has something protected associated with it - such as gay people campaigning for gay marriage or in my example campaigning against homophobia then it is suddenly protected.

Do you think the above is also 'discrimination' (feel free to consider UKIP in place of EDL if you're going to make an exception based on the political group)

(*I'm assuming they don't have a 'gay wing' but you never know)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom