TOTALLY GEEKED!

Acts 5: 21-32

When the high priest and his associates arrived, they called together the Sanhedrin—the full assembly of the elders of Israel—and sent to the jail for the apostles. 22But on arriving at the jail, the officers did not find them there. So they went back and reported, 23“We found the jail securely locked, with the guards standing at the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one inside.” 24On hearing this report, the captain of the temple guard and the chief priests were at a loss, wondering what this might lead to.

25Then someone came and said, “Look! The men you put in jail are standing in the temple courts teaching the people.” 26At that, the captain went with his officers and brought the apostles. They did not use force, because they feared that the people would stone them.

27The apostles were brought in and made to appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 28“We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.”

29Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings! 30The God of our ancestors raised Jesus from the dead—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross. 31God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins. 32We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd, your comment that I was replying to was:

"There is no argument or scripture or theology by which you can demonstrate any Biblical support for it whatsoever."

I provided "Biblical support". That fact that you believe it's contradicted elsewhere is of no interest to answering the question of "is it supported ANYWHERE?" Yes. It's supported. In the scripture I quoted.

---

You provided NO Biblical support for gay marriage.  Simply vague "love one another " references.  That is not SUPPORT and endorsement of gay marriage. 

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

But to say there's no support for it in any manner, anywhere, not on any page, nor in any verse, is simply untrue. - WYSIWYG

No one said that. - Tinydancer

_______________________

I beg to differ.

\\\\\\\\\\
==I swear WYSIWYG hasn't even seen a Bible let alone read it. It's quite obvious from his posts as they bear no resemblance to the actual written words in the Bible as opposed to his interpretation of what he wished it said. - Tinydancer

==But, don't pretend the Bible endorses it. There is no argument or scripture or theology by which you can demonstrate any Biblical support for it whatsoever. - Lady Gaga Snerd

==Saying anything else goes against everything else that is in the Bible. - Lawyerlady

==You provided NO Biblical support for gay marriage. Simply vague "love one another " references. That is not SUPPORT and endorsement of gay marriage. - Lady Gaga Snerd
//////////


There are 4 examples of people, one of them being you, clearly saying, in this thread, in various ways, "There's no support in the Bible for it, anywhere".

I disagree. I have posted support directly from the Bible for secular, legally recognized and accepted, gay marriage; if it's the law of the land. But, again, I also agree that there's no basis for support of it in a Christian setting (such as requiring churches to perform them if they don't wish to) as a religious sacrament/vow before God.

---

 What part of there is no support for gay marriage in the Bible don't you understand? None of us were talking about the laws of man, we were talking about the laws God gave us.

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

stop being so damned disingenuous--the bible is clear--sin is sin
- burns07

_____________________________

I agree. Sin is sin.

Do you agree that the Bible says (in Romans 13): "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment."?

---

So, then you are AGREEING that it is indeed a Sin?  Correct.  So, you are then agreeing that the Bible deems it to be Sin. 

Tinydancer wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

stop being so damned disingenuous--the bible is clear--sin is sin
- burns07

_____________________________

I agree. Sin is sin.

Do you agree that the Bible says (in Romans 13): "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment."?

---

So, then you are AGREEING that it is indeed a Sin?  Correct.  So, you are then agreeing that the Bible deems it to be Sin. 

---

 I don't think WYSIWYG understands what sin is and how it should be avoided. He agrees it's sin yet thinks it's ok to participate in someone elses sin. I think of it this way. If I knew my (imaginary) son wanted to stalk his ex girlfriend should I buy him binoculars so it's easier for him to spy on her? Buying binoculars is not illegal and he hasn't done anything wrong yet but I know what he wants to do with them.

---

 And you love him and if the situation were reversed you would want him to buy you the binoculars.  So love one another and buy them!

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

Acts 5:29 - Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. (KJV)

Christians are not bound to obey man's law when it contradicts God's law. The apostles were ordered by the governing authority to stop preaching the Word of God. They refused and rightly so.

You've cited Romans 13 multiple times. If you continue reading Romans 13, you will notice verse 13 says the following: Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. (NIV)
- chef

___________________________

I agree that Christians are not to obey Man's law when in Contradiction with God's law. That just means though that Christians shouldn't avail themselves of the law allowing them to get gay married. It doesn't mean that they should behave in a less than decent manner to others that believe differently than they do though. You mention Romans 13:13, By refusing to bake the cake, the baker violated the requirement to "behave decently" and "not in dissension".

I have no gripe with Romans 13:13. Behaving decently would be, in the case of a baker, providing the service you provide without discrimination. Baking a cake is not carousing, nor drunkenness, nor sexual immorality, nor debauchery, nor dissension, nor jealousy.

Behave decently. That's all that they should do.

---

 Refusing to bake a cake that is celebrating a sin IS behaving decently. Dissension, in that case, is also Biblically ok since God's law (homosexual marriage is a sin) trumps man's law (homosexual marriage is ok). Believing differently has nothing to do with anything. You can believe differently all you want. I prefer to go with what is actually written in the Bible rather what I wish it said. There are parts of the Bible I don't like but I don't seek out passages to uphold what I want it to say.

The Bible does not condone sin. Jesus said go forth and sin no more. Not get married and continue sinning. Not force people to bake a cake in celebration of your sin. etc. Love the sinner, hate the sin does not mean giving a thumbs up to the sinner to continue sinning.

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

So, then you are AGREEING that it is indeed a Sin? Correct. So, you are then agreeing that the Bible deems it to be Sin. - Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

Is the act of homosexual sex a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Absolutely. We are in complete agreement.

Is lying a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Based on how the homosexual couple was treated, because they sinned, liars also shouldn't get cakes baked for them, then.
Is sex before marriage a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Couples with a pregnant bride (obvious proof of sex) shouldn't get a cake.
Is adultery a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Adulterers shouldn't get cakes baked for them either.
Is divorce (except in the case of adultery) a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Most second marriages shouldn't get cakes.


We don't get to pick and choose what is sin and what isn't sin. What we do get to pick and choose is how we treat others. Some of us use Jesus as our example and treat others with love and respect, as he did. Some of us don't use His example.

---

Those are some good points.  And, I agree, that homosexuality is focused on more.   While there seem to be a lot of couples who attend Church who live together and not a peep.  Other sins like Pride, Gluttony, Wrath, etc, seem to be much less focused on.  We are in complete agreement there.

  However, while all that is true, the baker has the right to NOT want to participate, period. 

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

So, then you are AGREEING that it is indeed a Sin? Correct. So, you are then agreeing that the Bible deems it to be Sin. - Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

Is the act of homosexual sex a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Absolutely. We are in complete agreement.

Is lying a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Based on how the homosexual couple was treated, because they sinned, liars also shouldn't get cakes baked for them, then.
Is sex before marriage a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Couples with a pregnant bride (obvious proof of sex) shouldn't get a cake.
Is adultery a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Adulterers shouldn't get cakes baked for them either.
Is divorce (except in the case of adultery) a sin in the eyes of God? Yes. Most second marriages shouldn't get cakes.


We don't get to pick and choose what is sin and what isn't sin. What we do get to pick and choose is how we treat others. Some of us use Jesus as our example and treat others with love and respect, as he did. Some of us don't use His example.

---

Those are some good points.  And, I agree, that homosexuality is focused on more.   While there seem to be a lot of couples who attend Church who live together and not a peep.  Other sins like Pride, Gluttony, Wrath, etc, seem to be much less focused on.  We are in complete agreement there.

  However, while all that is true, the baker has the right to NOT want to participate, period. 

---

 Those of us who use the Bible as our guide use his words as our example. Some people make crap up so they can do as they please and pretend they are following the Bible. You might want to actually read it all some time WYSIWYG.

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

The problem with all of those examples? KNOWINGLY participating. First of all, we don't KNOW all the sins of everyone around us. We don't KNOW if they have repented of their sins. We don't KNOW that a divorce didn't occur because of adultery. That is between them and God. But there is no repentance in actively committing to live in sin "until death do us part". We DO know that homosexual sex is a sin that can't be fixed with "marriage".

Actively participating in other peoples sins - helping them lie or covering for them. Providing a place for people to have sex before marriage. Sleeping with someone who is married or allowing them to use your house for their affair. That would all be bad, as well.
- Lawyerlady

_____________________

You must have missed the provability of sex before marriage with the pregnant bride, in my examples. I do agree that we don't know all the sins of those around us. There's no denying that. However, if sins ARE known, would you agree with withholding services for the "known sinners"? What if the second marriage Bride, had her first wedding cake made at the same shop, and they knew she had been divorced? Should they make her a cake?  But the pregnant bride can repent of her sin of sex outside of marriage and future sex is not a sin once married. 

I do agree with you that the sin of homosexual sex cannot be "fixed" with marriage (you put the quotes around the wrong word, I believe). But, do we know that they will be having sex. Sex is not a part of every marriage, you know. Some people are medically or physically incapable of it and some just plain and simple don't want it.  Give me a break.  That would be an extremely rare occurrence, especially in such an small percentage pool to begin with.

Going to a secular wedding isn't "actively participating in other people's sin", whether they are gay, or have had premarital sex, or this is a second (or more) marriage, or whatever. You can believe that it is all that you want to, I will continue to believe that it's not. I do not agree.  And your opinion about MY beliefs does not matter one little iota.

---

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

Those of us who use the Bible as our guide use his words as our example. Some people make crap up so they can do as they please and pretend they are following the Bible. You might want to actually read it all some time WYSIWYG. - Tinydancer

_________________________

I have read all it. Extensively. I read some of it on a regular basis as well. Kind of an "ongoing refresher", if you will.

Have you actually read all of it? I know you read the parts about hate. Have you caught the parts about love and being a good person?

---

Lot's of people have read it extensively. I haven't missed the part about love and being a good person. I am loving and generous but I refuse to agree with every decision everyone else makes. I will be guided by ALL the words in the Bible. I'm not sure why you keep bringing hate into it because I don't hate anyone. I may not agree with them but I don't hate them. It's like when you brought gay orgies into the conversation like I had somehow said that. You obviously have reading comprehension skills so I'll take that into consideration when I think about your opinions on my walk with God.

WYSIWYG wrote:

---

Don't worry, Gaga. Based upon all the comments he has made about the Bible, even if he has read it - he didn't understand it - Lawyerlady

________________________

Jesus commands us to "turn the other cheek", so I shall.

I actually had a very on-point comment all ready, but then I thought, "What would Jesus do?" and decided to just let your post stand and speak for itself, and let it show how you treat people that follow the teachings of Jesus. Let people draw whatever conclusions that they may.

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I haven't read it (it's not mine), and I'm still of the opinion that the award is way out of line.

I still think the plaintiffs are like the predators / scam artists who stage slip-and-fall incidents in stores,

or who cause car crashes so they can sue and collect.

 

---

 From what I can tell the couple complained to the BLI.  At that point all actiojns were then taken by that department.  The couple is listed as a complaintant not as a plaintif.

flan327 wrote:

---

He has read the Bible...but continue to pretend otherwise.

flan

---

 How do you know?  Did you stand over him and watch?