Being A Christian

Author: Salixes

Posts

Read-only
Total: 20
Topic's author
#1
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
. . . . . . who happens to be a baker, Would you bake a wedding cake for:

* A groom with short hair and cleanly shaven?
(Leviticus 19:27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. )

* A couple with tattoos?
(Leviticus 19:28 Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. )

* A bride whose wedding dress is part polyester, Part silk?
(Leviticus 19:19 Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. )

* A gay couple?
(Leviticus 18:22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman. )



#2
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Salixes
A groom with short hair and cleanly shaven?
Why would a Christian baker expect a non-christian  to obey Leviticus?

A couple with tattoos?
Why would a Christian baker expect non-christians  to obey Leviticus?

A bride whose wedding dress is part polyester, Part silk?
How would the Baker know the wedding dress material of the bride? And why would a Christian baker expect a non-christian to obey Leviticus?

A gay couple?
How would the baker know the couple was having sexual relations? And why why would a Christian baker expect on-christians to obey Leviticus?

I am a Christian and I would gladly bake a cake for every group you mentioned. I don't expect non-christians to be bound by Leviticus.

In the real world, in a real life instance of this scenario, the Christian baker did not refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple.

But when he declined to decorate a cake for the couple, he was charged with discrimination by the state government.

The supreme court disagreed with the state (California of course) and chided the state for unfair and biased treatment of the bakers religious rights.

This thread, lifted directly from DDO, is the leftist chaffing at the sharp rebuke of the Supreme Court.

So they create a fake scenario, where they demand the baker acts incoherently by behaving as if Leviticus applies to non-christians, and think they have a gotcha! moment against Christians.

Now watch him dodge my questions.
#3
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Salixes
* A gay couple?
(Leviticus 18:22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman. )



The U.K. Supreme Court has ruled that two devoutly Christian owners of a bakeshop in Belfast were justified in refusing to bake a cake for a local gay rights activist.https://www.themonastery.org/blog/u-k-supreme-court-sides-with-christian-bakers-in-gay-marriage-cake-dispute


Court Sides with Christians

"Initially, a lower court actually ruled in Lee's favor, agreeing that he had been discriminated against by the business owners because of his sexual orientation. But subsequent appeals sent the case up to the Supreme Court, where justices ruled unanimously in favor of the Christian bakers" [.......................................

.] "In the end, the court decided that it was unfair to force the couple to endorse a message that so blatantly conflicted with their religious beliefs. 

Two Courts, Two Victories
"Christian groups frequently lament how their rights and religious freedoms are slowly being taken away".



Indeed they are. And  Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world. Yet, it appears that Islam is being pandered to all across the globe while Christians are being butchered by the thousands. Indeed the "religion of peace" stuck again in the UK just yesterday.




#4
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Now watch him dodge my questions.

Why shouldn't he? He has every right to ignore ALL of your questions, considering that it is his thread. You have totally ignored his questions and simply piled in with a load  your own questions as if by doing this  it makes his questions invalid. It doesn't, it negates ALL of your questions.

If you have questions simply start your own thread, That is what any normal person would do.
#5
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Salixes
I suggest you learn about the faith at an Orthodox Church, because the bible isn't intended to be interpreted and understood outside the context of the church.


Would I bake the cakes? Sure. Do I personally believe that a business has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason? Certainly.

In other words, if a baker does not want to bake a wedding cake for a man and his g.j orse, he should have the right to do so.


The government shouldn't tell churches who they can and cannot marry.

The government shouldn't tell churches that for anti-discrimination reasons we have to have sodomites on staff.

The government should stay out of the church, and that is what I care about. We don't need to be told we need women priests or deacons with sugar in the tank.



#6
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Now watch him dodge my questions.

Why shouldn't he?
Other than integrity? Nothing.

He has every right to ignore ALL of your questions, considering that it is his thread.
Then the same thing that has happened to you will happen to him. People will conclude that he is not interested in dialogue but is only looking for a platform to indulge his obsession.

If you have questions simply start your own thread, That is what any normal person would do.
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.

But whether he answers or dodges, the result will be the same. His poor thinking, his unreasonable bias, and his ignorance of Christian doctrine will be spotlighted.
#7
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Then the same thing that has happened to you will happen to him. People will conclude that he is not interested in dialogue 

Oh dear. You do love your assumptions don't you  and  speaking for all people again too.. 


Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.

I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the  questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging"  YOUR  questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread.. 

This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP. Which is your normal MO. 
#8
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.

I agree, 
If you did, you would answer questions.

You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the  questions that are the whole theme of the thread...
The threads are up for all to see. I answer your questions, you pretend not to see them and dodge my questions.

These are not guesses. This isn't subjective. The board has the record in black and white. You dodge questions.

And most people posting to you now, comment you your dishonest behavior instead of the thread's topic.

Ignoring it will only continue the phenomena.
#9
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.

I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the  questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging"  YOUR  questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread.. 
  
This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP. Which is your normal MO. 

#10
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Repeating your spam as if it was not addressed disrupts the flow of conversation homer. So does your constant stalking me about some personal grievance of yours.

If you have a problem, take it to the mods, not disrupt the thread and than claim someone else is disrupting the thread.

You cannot change empirical facts on the board. You posts show your dodges. This is a fact. Address that.
#11
Dynasty
Dynasty's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 220
1
1
7
Dynasty's avatar
Dynasty
1
1
7
-->
@Salixes
Citing Old Testament passages, are we?
Topic's author
#12
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Dynasty
More to the point:
Hiding (our) homophobia behind Old Testament passes are (we)?
Topic's author
#13
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Mopac
But the government should and does tell Churches and everyone else that it is wrong and illegal to vilify minority groups.
If Churches think that they are so high and mighty that they are above the law and use freedom to practice religion as an excuse for bigotry and inciting hatred, they can think again.
#14
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Salixes
The church does not incite hatred.

Quite the contrary, we are taught to be peaceable to all men.

If the government were to tell us that we have to marry same sex couples, the church will simply give up its marriage license. We will continue to marry according to our faith as is proper. 

The church doesn't marry people outside the church anyway.

We are not bigots. We do not teach hatred.

#15
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Repeating ........

I repeat my posts simply because when you quote my posts you slyly and deceitfully edit them and present them out of context and also present them in a way that promotes your own deluded and pervert bias agenda,. So while you are allowed to continuously get away with this blatant deceit,  I will simply keep re-posting MY whole quote over and over if I have to  and in full context. 



Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.

I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the  questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging"  YOUR  questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread.. 
  
This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP.         Which is your normal  MO. 

There is simply nothing honest or genuine about you ethang, You are just a compulsive liar who cannot help himself.

#16
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
I repeat my posts simply because when you quote my posts you slyly and deceitfully edit them and present them out of context and also present them in a way that promotes your own deluded and pervert bias agenda,
You repeat your lame posts with everyone. You repeat because you do not debate or answer questions. You repeat because you are vacuous.

So while you are allowed to continuously get away with this blatant deceit,  I will simply keep re-posting MY whole quote over and over if I have to  and in full context. 
You will keep spamming because only the accusation is your aim. You are fake. You can spam as much as you like. Your fakery will not fool anyone.

There is simply nothing honest or genuine about you ethang, You are just a compulsive liar who cannot help himself.
When I predicted that you would not like your fakery being exposed, you thought I was just talking, huh?

I don't run away from questions. You do. Do you know why defendants in court are forced to answer questions? So that the truth is revealed.

You lie, and then hide from questions. Everyone sees it. I told you, I don't need you to answer. Your fakery is still exposed even when you dodge.

Your poor thinking, your unreasonable bias, and your ignorance of Christian doctrine will be spotlighted.
#17
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
You repeat your lame posts with everyone.

That's right. And will keep doing so while you and anyone else insists on misquoting and misrepresenting what I say, And with  deceitful intent to promote your own agenda, in your case.

And it hasn't gone noticed that you have rudely and  impertinently ONCE AGAIN turned someone else's thread into a personal argument with me by  not showing the slightest  proper respect to the OP. You just cannot resist can you?

You are a fkn disgrace!!!!!
Topic's author
#18
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Mopac
Absolutely wrong and I have proven sufficiently that Churches do incite hatred against others.

#19
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
I repeat my posts simply because when you quote my posts you slyly...
Untrue. You repeat your post every time, whether I quote you or not. And you do so with everyone.

That's right. And will keep doing so while you and anyone else insists on misquoting and misrepresenting what I say, 
Does everyone "misquote and misrepresent" your posts?

You are a fkn disgrace!!!!!
And your parents must be so proud of you.

Stop spamming. Answer questions put to you. Behave like you were raised in a human family. You outlook will improve.
#20
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Salixes
I see no proof. I instead see someone who puts a lot of faith in their own understanding. I see something very common. The arrogance of egotism.