Nepal Earthquake
Extra Podcast #203 with Jeff, Ezra, Andy, Darcy and Greg topics include:
- Nepal earthquake
- Why does God allow natural tragedies? / Luke 13:1-5
- Different worldviews and religious outlooks
- Monuments/reminders of God’s faithfulness
- Prosperity gospel / Heb. 11
- To Bake or not to bake – Mt. 5:41 http://www.mortificationofspin.org/
There seems to be some ambiguity regarding refusal to bake cakes for same sex weddings (around the 40 min mark on this podcast).
The question recasts Jesus words to go the extra mile (Matt 5:41). So “if someone asks you to bake a cake, bake for them two.”
To reframe Jesus words this way is a clear distortion.
Here’s an example to show the line of reasoning;
if someone asks you to steal a car, steal for him two.
Or
If someone asks you to film a porn movie, film for him two.
Or
If someone asks a doctor to do an abortion, do for him two.
Or maybe an example from something Jesus could have been asked;
If someone asks you to carve an idol, carve for him two.
Going the extra mile is not immoral. These other examples violate a person’s conscience & convictions.
The problem isn’t baking a cake. The problem is contributing or participating in the celebration of a same sex wedding cerebration. These bakers have no problem baking a cake for a homosexual who is having a birthday party. The problem is being forced to use your creative skill and energy to decorate a cake with two men on it with all kinds of flowery words that promote a certain ideology that you deeply disagree with. How would promoting unrighteous behavior fit with “love does not rejoice in unrighteousness”? (1 Cor 13:6 NASB). If you participate in a same sex wedding, are you not rejoicing with those who are being wed?
Here’s another thing to think about. If a non Christian couple marry and later turn to Jesus, can their marriage be redeemed? Sure it can. That’s because their marriage is a real marriage.
But if two men marry and they turn to Jesus, can their marriage be redeemed? Wouldn’t they have to end their “marriage”?
One quick comment on the bake thing, I think when you put that open sign on the door you must serve everyone. Business is business after all, unless you think the person is a crook or unruly or threatening of course. Take me for example my day job is a general insurance agent and I sell insurance products for various insurance companies. When I put that professional “suit” on I must treat every customer the same. From a moral perspective and a faith perspective as we Christians are supposed to do everything for and in Christ which includes doing our job well to all equally. This in itself brings glory to God. Jesus would bake the cake in my opinion
also
Well I think we Christians over think this stuff as I recall back when the Haiti EQ how I was so distraught about this tragedy. I ended up running into a monk up at the Monastary in Mission and I was like perfect I will as his man of God. He pauses and says to me, well Mother Earth just burped and shrugged it off and then followed that up with I guess that’s why they say one must always keep death in front of their faith or something to that effect. And they lost a whole diocese Down there! Sure changed my perspective a bit, like it released a lot of steam in me. My take is we must persevere and be ready as bad things are bound to unfold in this broken world. The one bright side to these tragedies if here can even be one is the outpouring of humanity in response to aid and what not. They actually brings us closer together and may open doors for future opportunities.
I really can’t believe what I’m listening to!
If you want to get a cab from YVR is it ok for the cab driver to ask you if you’re Christian and then not give you a ride because you are?
Have you heard about the Parable of the Good Samaritan? Should we NOT be the good Samaraitian to everyone?!?!
Did the Samaraitian ask about the mans religious beliefs before helping him? sheesh…
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
This is the answer!!!
Daryl- I disagree with your analysis of the Good Samaritan passage in this context. Also, also know that I have a sister who’s gay, and who I love very much and am close to, so I take these conversations to heart, and very seriously.
The Samaritan helped a man who was dying on the side of the road. The text is pointing out that you ought to not be legalistic in your thinking as a Christian and help those who are in dire need of your help, regardless of how their beliefs and values differ from yours. You ask “Did the Samaritan ask about the mans religious beliefs before helping him?” You’re right, he didn’t, but this was because the man was dying on the road.
What’s at issue with respect to baking a cake for a same-sex marriage is a Christian baker being asked to violate his or her Christian conscience. It’s a moral question- is it moral or not to bake the cake? The gay couple are not lying there dying on the side of the road. They are asking a Christian to violate his/her Christian, Biblically-based convictions. ie. being a businessperson second and a Christian first- the Christian baker is being asked to bake a cake, which many (perhaps even most) would consider a symbol of celebration in this context, and as such, this act would be for him/her a Biblically moral wrong and they therefore cannot do it.
If my sister were left for dead on the side of the road, would I come to her rescue, regardless of her beliefs and values? Of course! If I were a baker and she got engaged to a woman and came to me to ask her to bake her wedding cake? I would absolutely decline. Is it the same scenario as the Good Samaritan? I argue that it isn’t at all.
This is not about denying service to anyone. Even the bakers in question would never ask a customer what their sexual preference is. These bakers had already baked cakes (just not wedding cakes) for said homosexual customers and did so gladly. But when a request is made for two male figurines with the words “Bill & Bob. Love Forever” well, the baker may start to wonder. The issue here is about being forced to celebrate immoral behavior.
There is a fine distinction here which is being ignored. Consider the example of restaurants. Like the insurance agent or cab driver mentioned earlier, restaurants also cater to anyone. The distinction is that, if a homosexual couple enters an establishment to eat, a simple transaction is taking place. The restaurant sells food and gets paid an agreed-upon price to do so. Barring other public disturbances, there is no issue here. The owner of the restaurant is not involved in the ideology, beliefs or convictions of his patrons. He is providing a service, and not being made to participate in any ideological venture. The homosexual diners are entitled to sit at the table and talk all day privately, about their agenda and desire to overturn laws, referendums, and whatever. The owner of the restaurant is not a participant, contributor, or involved in any way in their ideological bent. As far as the restaurant is concerned, it is doing nothing but providing a service—that is, serving food. What it need not provide, is active participation in an ideology that is not its own.
The crucial difference between the restaurant and the baker is that the baker is asked to participate, not just render a service disconnected from ideological engagement. This in fact happens when the baker is forced to participate in the same sex marriage event by decorating a cake. If a gay couple wants a cake which reads, “gay sex is ok,” now they are asking the baker to participate in their ideological convictions. The baker, at this point, is not simply serving food to the hungry, a completely non-ideological free-market transaction. He is being asked to involve himself and create an ideological object, “the gay cake,” that professes an aim and way of life that violates his convictions. This is no longer just a cake, but a political and ideological statement. There is a big difference for freedom of conscience between baking a cake and producing an “ideological cake.”
If the muslim cab driver is driving you to your christian wedding, should he be allowed to refuse you service?
If the muslim pilot is flying you to your christian honeymoon, should he be allowed to kick you off the flight?
Should the jewler be allowed to not sell you rings?
Should the agnostic hotel owner refuse you a room?
Is this the road we as Christians want to start to go down?
Jesus said Matthew 21:31
“Which of the two obeyed his father?” They replied, “The first.” Then Jesus explained his meaning: “I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do.
This is a matter of religious freedom. To be told as a business owner that I must participate in an activity that violates my conscience is the issue in play here. The examples cited by Daryl of a taxi driver or pilot are not quite the same thing qualitatively as baking the cake which actually celebrates the same-sex wedding. I also believe that the actual bakery in question where this incident took place was targeted. In other words, the same-sex marriage lobby used this particular incident politically to gain exposure in the media and in public discourse. This was probably a deliberate attack on religious freedom.
Ironically, the same- sex marriage marriage lobby is unwittingly “sawing off the branch they are sitting on” by seeking to curtail the freedom of Christians who hold positions and make decisions based on their consciences. Their own freedom of conscience and choice is based on the identical philosophical footing as the Christian business person.
Incidentally, the Matthew 21:31 verse is not really about this issue of conscience. It has more to do with obedience to God. The Pharisees made a great show of outward obedience but were inwardly unsubmissive to God’s will, while the outwardly sinful who acknowledged their sin were able to enter the Kingdom. That was Jesus’ point. Saying no (i.e. being rebellious outwardly) and then later repenting and obeying is better than saying yes (i.e. being outwardly obedient) but then actually disobeying.
Well let’s put the politics aside for a second and let’s look at this issue from a spiritual perspective. If it is true that everything a Christian does is for God and to bring him Glory then which would bring Him more Glory?
Also, if you want to take this up a notch spiritually and you truly believe that he Holy Spirit moves through us all including blessing a person or something we create with our hands or serve in a soup kitchen even blessing food. If this “blessing” actually transfers to the object itself which I believe it does. One can only look at the blessings one gives while packing food hampers or those little boxes at Christmas that we send overseas to people less fortunate. When we pray with someone who is on he fence with coming to Christ or hands on praying for healing. We do believe this correct? Then I would say we have to put our personal rules ect.. And in this case bake the cake and trust the Lord to use this act and cake to bring people to him. The whole writing thing on the cake is a mute point because a person can not ask you and expect you to write something that you think is immoral or offensive and you could easily side step this by letting them know where they could buy the materials to do this themselves and same with the figurines.
One last comment, with the participants on the podcast who said they would not bake the cake, well they are Pastors so that would be just a given.