Things I see in the S.A. and wonder at:

[TheDag]

You are changing subjects here. If you wish to discuss Women in ministry then start a new topic. Do not side tract this discussion.

Have a good weekend!

actually you made the topic and introduced the argument that Joshua is presenting you with. he is not changing the topic in any case. He is simply asking if your belief contradicts itself.

 

[Amisk]

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

Oh my word. Amisk, if this is actually possible for you to do, can you just answer a straight question with a straight answer. It's really very simple. I don't want to know what Spugeon says, I want to know what you say.

Should the Salvation Army have women officers?

Yes or No?

 

[Amisk]

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

So you condone and approve of the Salvation Army going against scriptural doctrine in terms of women in leadership roles, yet you condemn the Salvation Army on the area of re marriage of divorced people.

How do you explain these clear double standards? How do you justify picking and choosing the doctrines YOU deem to be untouchable and those which are not?

 

[Amisk]

[

 

[TheDag]

However Amisk you are still using double standards! If we take the principles mentioned by Spugeon then your view on divorce and re-marrying can not possibly be true because the bible would then contradict itself.

And you still have not covered the issue that putting away (or sending away) is not the same as divorce. Sending someone away without properly divorcing them means that it would be adultery if someone else was to take them as their spouse. The word translated as put away is a different word to that which is translated divorce.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

I was expecting your answer. That is why I took the time to explain to you why I agree with women in ministry. There is a vast difference between women in ministry and divorced folks remarrying.

Did you not notice that it was Jesus who out and out condemned re-marriage of divorced folks. He did it in clear statements, where those who oppose women in ministry do so by going against the example of Christ in dealing with women in his own ministry.

It appears to me that you are merely trying to justify a divorce and re-marriage problem. I would encourage you to study out that which I have pointed out to you. In the mean time there is no point in continuing this conversation.

The fact that you now decide you will not continue this discussion simply because you have been shown to be wrong is something I also expected.

The only arguement you based your OP on was that the Salvation Army was wrong because re marriage of divorced people is aginst biblical doctrine. When your clear double standards are laid bare you change your position to say that St Paul is wrong as well and only what Jesus said in the Bible actually matters. I don't blame you for jumping ship at this point Amisk. The old expression "When you find yourself in a hole...stop digging" is very good advice to you here.

I can only pray that you have not caused further hurt and suffering to people in situations where they have been through the trauma and pain of divorce and now have a loving and committed partner whom they wish to marry in the sight of God and their Christian family.

In the meantime please at least stay true to your own set of moving values, and stick to the letter of what Christ told you to do. First cut of your ears, slice our your tongue, gauge out both eyes and then cut off both feet and both hands. As the result of all that may leave you a little limited in movement, better if you first sell EVERYTHING you have and give the money to the poor.

I will continue to pray for you Amisk and for your hardened and corrupted heart. Your unloving and rejectionary attitudes are EXACTLY the thing that Jesus spent so much time having a go at the Pharisees about.

Remember what St Paul said (although I know you see him as something of a heratic)...."There is now NO comdemnation". Oh, by the way, Jesus said the same thing..."Neither do I condemn you".

 

[Lovely Lane]

Joshua, excellent posts, I had read Amisk OP and other claims and your response. Well done, I appreciate the knowledge of scripture and the gentle use of it. Amisk should do well in rethinking his positions. (honestly, it appeared to me amisk was looking for argument)

May God continue to bless the Sallies.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

Thank you my dear sister God Bless you

 

[TheDag]

The fact that you now decide you will not continue this discussion simply because you have been shown to be wrong is something I also expected.

With all due respect Andy you are misrepresenting Amisk views. he has stated that he does not believe the bible does teach that women in ministry is fine. I also believe that. Therefore he is not using double standards in that regard. Where he is using double standards is that he is not applying the same interpretation principles to the topic of divorce. There is a difference.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

With all due respect Andy you are misrepresenting Amisk views. he has stated that he does not believe the bible does teach that women in ministry is fine. I also believe that. Therefore he is not using double standards in that regard. Where he is using double standards is that he is not applying the same interpretation principles to the topic of divorce. There is a difference.

Where I'm saying he is using double standards is that he comdemns the Army for id re-marriage policy but will noy do so with regard to having women in leadership positions.

Yet both could be interpreted as being contrary to Biblical doctrine.

 

[Amisk]

I had said that I had made my last comment on divorce and re-marriage on this thread, however you had me railroading poor old Paul to the index of the Bible. So I turned to the writings of Paul to see if he had actually preached another gospel than that of Jesus Himself or if I had missed something.

I noted that Paul followed the commands of Christ, he too advocated that marriage was for a life time. After the death of one or the other of the partners, he advised that it was okay for the living spouse to remarry. In none of Paul’s comments did he contradict Christ’s firm stand on marriage and divorce. I check a couple of our English translations and they all seemed to come across with the same translation of Paul’s comments. .


"And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." KJV 1 Corinthians 7:10-11


"To those who are already married my command, or rather, the Lord’s command, is that the wife should not leave her husband. But if she is separated from him she should either remain unattached or else be reconciled to her husband. A husband is not, in similar circumstances, to divorce his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 Philips


"But to the married people I give charge—not I but the Lord—that the wife is not to separate from her husband.
But if she does [separate from and divorce him], let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband. And [I charge] the husband [also] that he should not put away or divorce his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 Amplified Bible (AMP)

Here is another spot where Paul spoke to the subject at hand:

King James Version (KJV)

"So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." Romans 7:3 KJV


" Accordingly, she will be held an adulteress if she unites herself to another man while her husband lives. But if her husband dies, the marriage law no longer is binding on her [she is free from that law]; and if she unites herself to another man, she is not an adulteress." Romans 7:3 Amplified Bible

"Accordingly she will be named no’eh-fet (adulteress) if, while her husband lives, she becomes another man’s. But if her ba’al (husband) dies, she is free from the Torah, so that she is no no’ehfet (adulteress) if she becomes another man’s." Romans 7:3 Orthodox Jewish Bible

Does that sound as if Paul said nothing about divorce and remarriage? While perhaps he was not as strong as Christ on the subject, one has to admit that he backed Christ on marriage and divorce as he did on all of the teachings of Christ.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

You know what Amisk? I'm really too tired to argue with any more. Besides, it only seems to encourage you so it's probably not a good idea.

Your views do not represent those of The Salvation Army and for that I truely thank God. Whats more you are in Canada, several thousand miles away, so your views cannot cause hurt to anyone in my country who is already suffering enough having gone through the process of divorce.

I will continue to pray for a change in your hard hearted views.

Let me make it very very clear to anyone else reading this thread though. The views expressed here by Amisk are NOT the Views of The Salvation Army, either in the UK or elsewhere. Please do not allow his views to hurt you or deter you from seeking help from The Salvation Army. Please get in touch with your local Salvation Army church.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

For anyone who may have missed this earlier in the thread, here is The Salvation Army's positional statement on the marriage of divorced people, as posted by my wife (who would not be allowed to be if Amisk had his way)

Indeed, as I have already stated elsewhere, Army standpoint on this is as follows;

"Jesus taught that divorce is failure (Mark 10:2-12; Matthew 19: 3-9). Salvationists believe, however, that his attitude to those caught up in marital strife would never be anything but loving and compassionate.

Therefore, The Salvation Army, whilst defending vigorously the ongoing relevance of God's will for men and women in relation to marriage, recognizes the reality that some marriages fail. It is therefore willing, under God, to offer counsel and practical help to couples so affected.

The Army permits (but does not require) its officers to perform a marriage ceremony for a divorced person, following careful counselling, where it is considered that remarriage could lead to the healing of emotional wounds. Sound doctrine with practical mercy are the hallmarks of the Salvationist's approach to marital and emotional strife."

 

[TheDag]

Amisk are you ever going to address translation issues? just quoting english language is not addressing it. the original language is translated as put away which is not the same as divorce. you also have not addressed the fact that the bible contradicts itself if remarriage is not allowed.

 

[Amisk]

 

[Amisk]

 

[Amisk]

[