Skip to main content

Bake them two cakes- but still call sin and unbelief what they are

As I've said before, I personally don't see how selling a wedding cake to a gay couple is endorsing their "marriage," or their sex lives, or anything else. It's selling them a cake, period.

But I carelessly shared a meme on Facebook the other day without checking out the blog post to which it linked. The meme said, "If a gay couple asks you to bake them a wedding cake, bake them two." A paraphrase of the Sermon on the Mount- and, I think, a very apt one.

But the blog post it linked to was terrible both logically and theologically. I posted a mea culpa on my Facebook page, complete with an explanation of what I found wrong with the post.

As it happens the Manhattan Project blog also posted a response to the post here. I commend it to you.

This is what I wrote:

Yesterday I posted a meme which suggested, paraphrasing Jesus, that "if a gay couple forces us to bake them a wedding cake, we should bake them two." I commented that to do so is not to endorse gay marriage, but merely to sell them a cake. I want to make it absolutely clear that I DO NOT ENDORSE the content of the post to which it links. It is intellectually dishonest and contrary to the Faith.

I'll say this as gently as I can, but it needs to be said.

First, that homosexuality is immoral and contrary to the Faith isn't a matter of opinion. Jesus explicitly endorsed the OT moral law (including the prohibition of homosexual activity) in Matthew 5:17-20 (the same chapter quoted by the blog!) and in Luke 16:17. And no, questions about ham sandwiches and sacrifices are not apt, since Jesus did specifically abrogate the ceremonial and dietary laws (see Mark 17:19, among other passages). What Paul has to say about these in Galatians (contrast what he has to say about homosexual activity in Romans and 1 Corinthians!) and the whole thrust of the Epistle to the Hebrews make it clear that it's the dietary and ceremonial laws, not the Moral Law, which Jesus abolished. And neither Judaism nor Christianity has ever had the slightest difficulty telling these apart. Moreover, Jesus DID explicitly define marriage as being between a man and a woman in Matthew 19:4 and parallels.

No, this is not a matter of opinion (or interpretation; what the Bible has to say about homosexual activity is perfectly consistent in every stratum of both Testaments). We don't get to "not believe" that homosexual behavior (as opposed to orientation- a concept less than a century old and condemned nowhere in Scripture!) is immoral. And Paul says of people who practice homosexuality that they "shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (I Corinthians 6:9-11). So yeah, it DOES matter. And we have no alternative- certainly no loving alternative- but to warn of that. Not judging people does not mean condoning their sin or failing to condemn sin in the abstract. And btw, the two terms translated "homosexuality" in the NT are the same terms traditionally used in Greek for the active and passive partners in such activity.

The Scriptures are as clear and as consistent on this point as they are about anything. To claim to be a Christian and to take the position that homosexual behavior is not a sin is not intellectually honest. In fact, it's hypocritical.

I agree that we do not condone homosexual activity or "marriage" when we sell a wedding cake to a gay couple. Other forms of coerced involvement in gay "marriages" may well violate people's consciences in ways which transgress the First Amendment. In any case, the very valid argument that what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is none of anybody else's business ceases to be valid when the people engaging in that activity MAKE it their business by compelling them to be involved in it.

I'm sorry, but this post's suggestion that homosexual activity even might not be sinful contradicts not only the teaching of Jesus but of every stratum of both Testaments. And to take this position at a time when the right of Christians to practice their beliefs is under threat comes pretty close to being the modern equivalent of burning incense to the Emperor.

The position the blogger takes cannot be tolerated in any church with the desire to remain faithful to the content of the Faith- a concept which simply cannot change because we don't like it or because it's unfashionable. I have gay friends I love dearly, and I wish that it were otherwise. But it would be unfaithful and dishonest for me to pretend that such is the case.

As I said above, from a biblical view that homosexual activity (not orientation!) is morally wrong and that same-sex "marriage" is an oxymoron is patent. It is not a matter of opinion. It is not a matter of interpretation. Every stratum of both Testaments agree. The Bible is as clear on these two points as it is on anything.

But I still don't see anything wrong in selling a gay couple a wedding cake.


Popular posts from this blog

McMullin, Kasich, Hickenlooper, Huntsman, or somebody else sane in 2020!

I don't expect to be disenfranchised in 2020. I'm looking forward to Evan McMullin running against President Trump and whatever left-wing extremist the Democrats nominate. McMullin may or may not run for the Senate next year, and he may or may not run for president as an independent again next time around, but the nation can't afford to lose its most eloquent and intelligent critic of the populist takeover of the Republican party and the Executive Branch. We need the man in public life.

But interesting alternatives have developed. Ohio Gov. John Kasich has been mentioned as a potential primary challenger for Mr. Trump. I hope somebody continues the fight for the soul of my former party, even though I believe it to be a lost cause. Entrepreneur Mark Cuban is reportedly also considering a challenge to Mr. Trump. While I tend to see him at this point as somewhere to the left of where a candidate I would feel comfortable supporting might be, I would wish him well. Still, I see…

A modest proposal for a shocking innovation which is completely within the rules but which would, if adopted, revolutionize college football

I call it defense.

The idea- crazy as it may sound- is to supplement the scoring of points by your offense with an attempt to stop the other team from scoring them. Yeah, I know.  Really "out there," isn't it? But it has a history of winning not only games but championships. Modern college teams should try it more.

I'm a bit bummed about the Rose Bowl outcome but amused by the score. It seems that certain conferences aren't sure whether they're playing college football or high school basketball! I've noticed that in the scores of Sooner games. Last season the nation's college teams set a record by scoring an average of slightly more than 30 points each per game. That's a lot. Historically, that's a REAL lot.

The final score of the Rose Bowl was 54-48, though to be fair that was in double overtime. But to get there, the teams had to be tied 45-45 at the end of regulation! Last year was even worse. Southern Cal beat Penn State 52-49- in regulat…

Reflections on the present and future of my Blackhawks

As this season from hell creeps to its close at an excruciating pace and makes all of us devote more of our attention to spring training for the Cubs than we otherwise might, there are calls for the heads of Blackhawks GM Stan Bowman and even the greatest coach in Blackhawks history, Joel Quenneville.

No general manager or coach could have made Marian Hossa and Corey Crawford healthy or prevented Toews and Keith and Saad from having the worst seasons of their careers or foreseen that a series of trades most of which made perfect sense at the time wouldn't pan out. The Hawks are one season removed from the second-best regular season in their history. This will be the first time in a decade that they haven't made the playoffs.

With the exception of the Pens, maybe the Kings and (for different reasons) the Golden Knights, every other team in the NHL would kill to have won three Stanley Cups in the past decade. In fact, only the Hawks, the Pens, the Kings, the Wings, and the Brui…