Is Andy Stanley right or wrong?

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by SolaSaint, Feb 20, 2014.

  1. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
  2. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    11
    First of all, I wouldn't trust Stanley to exegete a stop sign.

    That having been said, I believe he's confusing his personal opinion with "what Jesus would do".

    The Bible neither says "bake a cake" or "don't bake a cake". It's a matter of conscience and if someone is of the opinion that baking a cake for a gay "wedding" would violate their conscience, then there's not a thing in the world wrong with that.
     
    #2 JohnDeereFan, Feb 20, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2014
  3. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    I think you missed a "not". I agree Andy is pretty loose in his exegesis.
     
  4. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,134
    Likes Received:
    221
    From the Link:
    Evangelical pastor Andy Stanley leads North Point Ministries, the second largest church in the U.S. He told me he finds it "offensive that Christians would leverage faith to support the Kansas law." He said, "Serving people we don't see eye to eye with is the essence of Christianity. Jesus died for a world with which he didn't see eye to eye. If a bakery doesn't want to sell its products to a gay couple, it's their business. Literally. But leave Jesus out of it."

    The Bible calls such action as an abomanation. Further Jesus NEVER condoned such behavior.
    I'm wondering what Andy would do, if the law required ministers to preform homoxexual weddings? Would he refuse?

    My question to those who hate the proposed Kansas Law - why would they want to deal with such a business. Wouldnt you want someone who will give their best for your?
     
    #4 Salty, Feb 20, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2014
  5. Berean

    Berean
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    817
    Likes Received:
    1
  6. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    ..............................
     
    #6 saturneptune, Feb 21, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 21, 2014
  7. SolaSaint

    SolaSaint
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    25
    I will commend anyone who so-called bashes anyone who tries to put words in Jesus mouth, especially when the words do not match the person of Christ.
     
  8. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    Serving a homosexual couple for their homosexual wedding is a matter of conscience. If Stanley does not see that this would and should raise concerns for Christians then he has issues.
     
  9. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    I live in Kansas. I'm as conservative and biblically based as they come. But this law should not have passed the House. It was discriminatory in the worst sense of the word. It was designed to treat gays as second-class citizens. And furthermore, it is not necessary. Kansas already allows store owners, service companies and other firms that deal with the public to post "We reserve the right" signs that essentially state that they can refuse service to anyone.

    This bill did not cover gay marriages by pastors in Kansas for one simple reason: Gay marriage are not recognized in Kansas. So that part of the discussion is moot, and has nothing to do with this archaic law that never should have been conceived. I'm glad the Senate voted it down. The last thing was as Christians should do, and certain the last thing a state wants to do, is be discriminatory toward a segment of the population. This would have indeed been exactly what Powers calls it, a "Jim Crow" law, and it was a bad idea. As Powers quoted Stanley, "Jesus taught that if a person is divorced and gets remarried, it's adultery. So if (Christians) don't have a problem doing business with people getting remarried, why refuse to do business with gays and lesbians."

    We don't need to demonize, discriminate against, or hate gays. We need to love them enough to give them the gospel.
     
  10. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    Absolutely there are instances in which we need to discriminate. We will not marry them or accept their marriage as legitimate.



    We will not participate in their marriages.

    And if we put laws on the books allowing for the choice of conscience, given their political agenda, it is entirely appropriate.
     
  11. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    620
    I'm with Stanley on this one. If someone doesn't want to serve cake at a gay marriage, simply decline to take on the job, no reason need be given.

    Should the bill get passed, because of the way it was worded, business owners could post signs (or may be compelled?) on their doors, "We don't serve gays in this facility" similar to the "no guns allowed on these premises" signs you now see in some states that have conceal carry laws.
     
  12. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,386
    Likes Received:
    790
    See this is number 1 wrong and number 2 where the problem lie. They tried that here in NM and the homosexuals sued and the photographer was given a judgment by the humans rights commission to do it.


    It is just not as simple as refuse service.
     
  13. Walter

    Walter
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    1,285
    Likes Received:
    2
    "Evangelical pastor Andy Stanley leads North Point Ministries, the second largest church in the U.S. He told me he finds it "offensive that Christians would leverage faith to support the Kansas law." He said, "Serving people we don't see eye to eye with is the essence of Christianity. Jesus died for a world with which he didn't see eye to eye. If a bakery doesn't want to sell its products to a gay couple, it's their business. Literally. But leave Jesus out of it."

    Rome, A.D. 64: “Hey it’s just a pinch of incense, it isn’t a big thing and you should be willing to serve those who are worshipers of the Emperor. You can refuse if you want, but don’t bring Jesus into it. And by the way, if you refuse to do it bad things will happen to you.”
     
  14. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    11
    Good. Business owners should have the liberty to decide who they want to do business with.
     
  15. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    11
    Why do I get the feeling this was originally directed at me?
     
  16. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    620
    IIRC, the photographer actually stated that he didn't want to take part in a gay marriage because it violated his constitutionally protected religious beliefs. Why not simply refuse the job with no reason given?
     
  17. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
     
  18. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    One more time: This law was not about marriages. It was about discrimination. Gay marriage in Kansas is not recognized. This law would have done absolutely nothing that Kansas law doesn't already allow merchants and service companies to do with a simple sign that says, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." We didn't need this law in Kansas. ITL is right. Simply refuse the job, don't give a reason. End of story. There is no reason to codify blatant discrimination in the state statutes.
     
  19. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,134
    Likes Received:
    221
    I agree its about discrimination - good discrimination
     
  20. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no such thing as "good" discrimination.
     

Share This Page

Loading...