Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | Hank | 144401 | ||
Gill's trash? Good reminder, that. I must clean out my library tomorrow. Along with Gill's trash, out goes the works of John Bunyan, Thomas a Kempis, St. Augustine, Charlie Spurgeon, William Penn, Jonathan Edwards, Matthew Henry, Milton, Aquinas, John Woolman, John MacArthur, Charles Ryrie, C. I. Scofield and, oh yes, may as well toss out Shakespeare, Dante and Dickens too while I'm in the cleaning mood. --Hank | ||||||
2 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | Searcher56 | 144453 | ||
Hank - Read post 144451 ... should be be silent if Spurgeon, Gill, Meyers, Hagin or others contradict Scripture? | ||||||
3 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | Hank | 144464 | ||
Hi, Searcher. No, brother, I don't think you or any other Christian should be silent when it is clearly evident that someone, whoever he may be, has contradicted Scripture or otherwise introduced false doctrine into his testimony. However, one should always be cautious and double check to be sure that his own position aligns squarely and inimpeachably with Scripture before rushing to judgment of another's view. It's a terrible thing to lay on another's shoulder the fault we perceive in him only to discover later that the fault was less his than ours. I know this from painful personal experience. God's continuing grace and blessings to you as for His truth you continue to search, Searcher. --Hank ..... P.S. I don't believe I'd put Meyers and Hagin in the same league with Spurgeon and Gill! :-) --HH | ||||||
4 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | Searcher56 | 144467 | ||
Hank - I wouldn't put Meyers and Hagin in with Spurgeon and Gill ... or even you, even if they studied Scripture to state their point. I may be off base ... and will admit I ma wrong when proven. I try to be 100 percent correct - so I take my time checking the Bible more than what others say. |
||||||
5 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | Emmaus | 144483 | ||
Searcher, A point no one seems to be making is that the sin in these verses comes not with the divorce, but with marriage to another after a divorvce. And divorce was pretty much a one way street in Biblical times. The man did the divorcing at his pleasure. I believe getting beat with a baseball bat or even with fists is a good reason for getting a divorce and God does not expect any woman to be a punching bag for her "husband". One who is being battered must respect and protect their body which is the temple of the Holy Spirit. In today's world that often means divorce. The biggest problem in many case is getting the battered woman to leave the abusive man before he does permanent damage and even kills her. I have seen it. Emmaus |
||||||
6 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | EdB | 144484 | ||
Emmaus Good point I thought it was understood the real problem was with remarriage but your right no one spelled it out. Protecting yourself in these situations is what needs to be done. No woman should ever stay in the situation where she is being abused in any way, physically or mentally. I'm very slow in recommending divorce as I have seen it cause far more problems than it solved but it shouldn't be rule out in cases of abuse. But saying that does not open the door for remarriage. EdB |
||||||