Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 What do you think? Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 http://spectrummagazine.org/journal/40/2 Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
doug yowell Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 What do you think?Is this a trick question? Quote
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted July 13, 2012 Members Posted July 13, 2012 I think Yukon Golds can get along nicely with Idaho Russets... and could lead the church in Commentators on the Acts.. Quote Pam Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others?
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 Originally Posted By: Woody What do you think? Is this a trick question? I take it from your response that you feel it's a no-brainer. Well some here may be opened minded. Have you read the link? Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
doug yowell Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 ] I take it from your response that you feel it's a no-brainer. Well some here may be opened minded. Quote
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 read the link Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
doug yowell Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 read the linkYou can't tell me what to do!! Quote
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 let's not get nasty about it. :( Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
doug yowell Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 read the linkI went there and found the headline but couldn't navigate my way to the story. Got a different link or is it just me? Quote
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 Let me just say that this is a well written SDA pastor who wrote this article and he suggests that we should let cohabs be leaders. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
cricket Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 Scroll to pages 37-42. It is not as simple as Woody suggests. The author does not suggest we let all persons who cohabitate with one another serve as leaders; he is merely suggesting that those who are cohabiting with one another in a more "biblical" way than some who live as married couples might be better suited to serve as leaders and that we should't rule those people out of leadership roles. http://spectrummagazine.org/sites/default/files/spectrum_journal/40.2_Spectrum_Spring2012_WEB_0.pdf Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted July 13, 2012 Moderators Posted July 13, 2012 What do you think? Let me give you a couple of scenarios. A woman is divorced by her husband through no fault of her own and receives a pretty good sum for alimony. She falls in love with a man who is unemployed or can't get a job for some reason. If she officially marries him, she loses the alimony and would have nothing. But if they just "cohabitate", she/they would have something to live on. There are probably a number of senior citizens who are cohabiting these days because if they lived separately, they would not be able to make it financially. And if they officially get married, the woman very likely would lose her pension and they would have to live on his pension alone which would be too inadequate for both of them. Quote
doug yowell Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 So God doesn't require a public marriage commitment if it hurts a couple financially? And He looks the other way when they engage in those things marrieds do because it's really all about the money? Quote
cricket Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 It is an interesting article and worthy of the read. Thank you for sharing, Woody. Hopefully more people will read it. Quote
olger Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 ABSOLUTELY NOT> Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.."
Woody Posted July 13, 2012 Author Posted July 13, 2012 It is an interesting article and worthy of the read. Thank you for sharing, Woody. Hopefully more people will read it. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Tallmark Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 It's the same as homosexuality, or having one night stands: IT'S WRONG! I'm sick of hearing all the "buts" concerning this. Won't get ss, won't get alimony, yadda yadda yadda. Is it any different than taking a job where one has to work Sabbath? Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted July 13, 2012 Moderators Posted July 13, 2012 So God doesn't require a public marriage commitment if it hurts a couple financially? And He looks the other way when they engage in those things marrieds do because it's really all about the money? Do we need a public ceremony to be married in the sight of God? Can't committed couples just exchange vows before God and be recognized by heaven as married? Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted July 13, 2012 Moderators Posted July 13, 2012 Anyone actually read the article? Had trouble going to the article. Quote
cricket Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 Scroll to pages 37-42. http://spectrummagazine.org/sites/default/files/spectrum_journal/40.2_Spectrum_Spring2012_WEB_0.pdf Quote
JoeMo Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 After reading and reflecting upon the article, I don't think one can make a blanket statement the cohabitators should or shouldn't be leaders. It's a complex situation; and each case needs to be considered on it's own merits. Some would say that once one is intimate with a member of the opposite sex, you are "married" in God's eyes (unless one is already married to someone else - then it's adultery); and the wedding is just a civil formality. People who have cohabitated and remained faithful to one another for an extended period of time are (in many states) subject to "common law marriage ". Couples who are living together as "friends with benefits" should not be church leaders - especially youth leaders. Like I said earlier - it's a complex situation that warrants investigation of each case seperately. On the other hand, I used to be a member of a church where a cohabitating couple was disfellowshipeed in an ugly and very public way. I was pretty upset about it - not because they were held accountable; but because of the ugly and scandalous way it was done. I'm glad I don't have to make the call! Quote
GreatLakesGramma Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 It would be more helpful if you'd post the article itself, Woody. I think you have to be subscribed to read the article. I can't open it. All I get is the home page for the site. As far as not getting married for financial reasons, since when are financial matters a legitimate excuse for violating God's will? And as far as a wedding, that isn't really necessary, but for it to be a legitimate marriage, the requirements of the law by which one's society considers it a genuine, legal marriage, probably need to be followed in order for God to consider it a genuine marriage. After all, the woman at the well was living with a man, but Jesus Himself said that the man she had was not her husband. So cohabitation doesn't seem to be quite enough in God's eyes. When you read the Bible, the marriages of the patriarchs followed all the legal requirements, even if there wasn't a ceremony. When Abraham's servant bargained with Rebekah's father and brother, that amounted to a legally recognized marriage transaction, even though we don't read of any ceremony taking place when Isaac and Rebekah actually met. The laws of those times were followed. When Jesus' mother was found pregnant before the wedding ceremony, even though she was legally betrothed to Joseph and was already considered to be legally bound to him as his wife, the marriage ceremony required by their laws had not taken place, so she was still considered to be a fornicator if, as they assumed, she had had sexual relations with Joseph. I would rather be alone in old age, than to live with a man to whom I was not legally married simply for financial reasons. Or if I chose to share a home with someone of the opposite gender without being married, for companionship and mutual support, it would be a strictly platonic relationship. I want to be faithful and obedient to God, regardless of the earthly consequences. He has always been faithful to me, and I am not going to throw away my trust in His will just because any particular situation might cause me some earthly discomfort, or even suffering, unless I compromise with the world's godless ways. Quote Catherine God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever. Psalm 73:26. "To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable, because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you." -- C. S. Lewis
cricket Posted July 13, 2012 Posted July 13, 2012 Posting the article itself would a violation of copyright laws. It is easily enough to retrieve if you just go to the website. You do not have to be a member or subscribe to the magazine. Scroll to pages 37-42. http://spectrummagazine.org/sites/default/files/spectrum_journal/40.2_Spectrum_Spring2012_WEB_0.pdf Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.