PDA

View Full Version : Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher?


dianetavegia
08-08-2003, 12:56 PM
What you say leads to: a pastor can be a repentant liar, thief, adulterer even, but he cannot be a repentant divorcee. Now you have just invented the "second unpardonable sin!" Let's discuss this remark. Can a divorced man be a pastor in YOUR church or a pastor to YOU?

Diane

Johnv
08-08-2003, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Can a divorced man be a pastor in YOUR church or a pastor to YOU?Yes. unlike drunkenness and adultery, divorce is not a sin, unless done for sinful reasons.

aefting
08-08-2003, 01:46 PM
At my church, we understand the Biblical qualification to exclude divorced individuals from holding the office of pastor or deacon.

I think a more interesting question is if a man marries a divorced woman, does that disqualify the man from holding those positions? For the purpose of the discussion, let's assume that the woman was innocent and divorced for Biblically allowed reasons.

Andy

Scott J
08-08-2003, 06:23 PM
Originally posted by aefting:


I think a more interesting question is if a man marries a divorced woman, does that disqualify the man from holding those positions? For the purpose of the discussion, let's assume that the woman was innocent and divorced for Biblically allowed reasons.

Andy That's the case with my pastor... and I still think it is an interesting question.

Wisdom Seeker
08-08-2003, 08:53 PM
Diane, you know that glitch that I was telling you about , about when my "recent posts" list shows other peoples posts and not mine? Your post, is on my list.

I'll report it to the webmaster. Weird glitch.

dianetavegia
08-08-2003, 09:07 PM
My church does not allow a divorced man or a man married to a divorced woman to be a pastor or a deacon. We feel scripture that says 'husband of one wife' (not one at a time) covers this qualification quite well.

Personal opinion... ONLY personal opinion... Except in the case of repeated patterns of unrepented adultery, I believe a Christian should forgive their spouse as commanded by Jesus. Someone has asked me if I would forgive 70 X's 7 and I'm not sure...... I cannot honestly answer that. Therefore, I do not believe in divorce.

Laurenda, that IS odd! I noticed today that 'Today's Active Topics' might have MY name on someone else's post but when you open the post it's correct. Glitch alright! LOL

Diane

donnA
08-08-2003, 09:56 PM
At our church a man can not be divorced and be a deacon or pastor. I really don't know about the wife, an issue like that has not come up.

I've been seeing that weird posting stuff too.

gb93433
08-08-2003, 10:22 PM
God used Moses to lead His people and he muredered a man. David was used by God and he coveted another man's wife and had her husband killed. Peter cut off a man ear. Paul persecuted believers and I would assume that meant killing them also.

Nicky Cruz was a gang member. He wrote the book Run Baby Run. We have loads of examples of men who have done things that would cause any of us to cringe. Yet God used all of them to lead people for His glory in spite of their past.

God does care so much where we have been but where are we going.

aefting
08-09-2003, 08:09 AM
I agree that God can use anybody. Just because someone does not meet the Biblical qualifications for a pastor or deacon doesn't mean that God can't use him in another area of ministry.

Andy

dianetavegia
08-09-2003, 09:23 AM
I agree Andy! God can use these men in many ways but they do not fit the scriptural qualifications of 'husband of one wife' so therefore cannot be a pastor or deacon.

However, I have heard some wonderful traveling evangelist who testify of what they were and what they are now that they have met Jesus! Wonderful testimonies but they don't pastor churches.

Our minister of music in our church is divorced. This happened way before we moved here. His wife was unable to have children (not sure if it was him or her) and she decided she no longer wanted to be married. She left him and divorced him. He has never dated or remarried (because of scripture) and neither has she. The church voted to allow him to stay. He NEVER preaches or teaches. He'll be retiring soon.

Diane

Mike McK
08-09-2003, 10:32 AM
Depends on the circumstances surrounding the divorce.

Mike McK
08-09-2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by WisdomSeeker:
Diane, you know that glitch that I was telling you about , about when my "recent posts" list shows other peoples posts and not mine? Your post, is on my list.

I'll report it to the webmaster. Weird glitch. I've had the same problem.

aefting
08-09-2003, 10:44 AM
One more thing about our church. Our constitution says that those on the pastoral staff (i.e., music pastor, youth pastor, etc.) must also meet the Biblical qualificaitons for a pastor. They are, after all, "elders" in the Biblical sense.

Andy

dianetavegia
08-09-2003, 10:48 AM
1 Timothy 3:1-7 1 This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop,* he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. If a wife is involved in adultery and leaves her husband, was he able to rule his own house well? Would this not disqualify this man as well?

Diane

Gunther
08-09-2003, 10:51 AM
Diane, you are right on the mark with this one.

Divorce could disqualify a man on several accounts: blameless, not ruling his house well, or the husband of one wife clause, depending on what the divorce was.

Any of those violations DISQUALIFY a person.

Most people do not want to deal with divorce because either they have been or know someone or ... :rolleyes: . Rarely does the Scripture define these discussions.

Molly
08-09-2003, 11:07 AM
Although,I believe that phrase *husband of one wife* refers to the character of the man and his faithfulness to one women,I do agree with the fact that a divorce man is not eligible to pastor,based on the qualifications of above reproach and ruling his household. I think divorce is looked upen too leniently today.

What about a man who is divorced before his repentance and salvation....and then has a desire to preach/pastor? He was married,divorced,then saved later...now is married,is a godly husband and father,and meets all other requirements. Can he pastor?

What do you think?

Molly

cireofmi
08-09-2003, 12:05 PM
The way I see it, is that someone can only remarry if they were widowed. That is only way someone can have more than one wife and be allowed to Pastor a church.
Matthew 5:32
Mark 10:11-12

Gunther
08-09-2003, 12:43 PM
Molly, good thoughts and questions.

I would have to say that such a man needs to be encouraged to fulfill many functions within the church (teaching is one). The role of 'overseer' though is limited to certain men though. So, any capacity that is available that is not an 'elder/overseer' is okay.

gb93433
08-10-2003, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by aefting:
I agree that God can use anybody. Just because someone does not meet the Biblical qualifications for a pastor or deacon doesn't mean that God can't use him in another area of ministry.

Andy Are you saying that it is okay to kill someone and pastor pastors and plant churches but it is not scriptural to pastor a church? That is what Paul did.

John Wells
08-10-2003, 06:54 PM
An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. (Titus 1:6)

Here's a scenario to use in debating this:

Two men live wild and disobedient lives in their teens and twenties. One marries and divorces and the other marries and somehow their marriage survives these turbulent times.

They both receive Christ as their Savior around age 30 and become new creations in Christ. After ten years of spiritual growth they feel God's call to the ministry. After seminary they are ready to being their faithful calling to pastor their first church.

Now the positional view of some will say the divorced man is not biblically qualified to be a pastor based on Tit 1:6 and 1 Tim 3:2 (which has the identical wording of "husband of but one wife"). I can only find two translations (NAB and NRSV - which contradicts teh RSV) that render this as "married only once." The multitude of others render it similar to the NIV quoted above.

One cannot wedge divorced man into these passages from either the literal meaning of "husband of but one wife," (as MacArthur, Dr. Bob, and Pastor Larry agree means a "one-woman man") nor does the original Greek lead to a "married only once" interpretation.

My position (based on the Greek) is that this speaks to marital fidelity rather than status. The intended admonition here is that a pastor be faithful to his wife - a one-woman man! This fits with the rest of the admonitions that deal with a pastor having charge and control (being the spiritual leader) over his family. It doesn't say a pastor cannot be divorced! That is out of context and doesn't fit with the rest of the admonitions.

Also, disqualifying the one pastor because of the sin of divorce while applying God's grace to the multitude of their other sins implies that divorce is a "second unpardonable sin!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Bob
08-10-2003, 07:27 PM
Jesus taught divorce was legal under certain circumstances. Right?

Jesus taught that UNLESS the divorce was legal, the person was to remain unmarried. Right?

Therefore, a pastor MAY be divorced and remarried IF the circumstances were proper.

Two Scriptures that come into this debate:
Matthew 5ff does NOT say a divorced person cannot remarry; only one not biblically divorced. The "exception" clause applies to every part of that verse. Don't you dare wrest the Scripture from its context!

Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:
and
whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, saving for the cause of fornication , committeth adultery.The other passage "one-woman man" has been clearly dealt with. I was a pastor before I was married. Was that a sin? No. Now I am a One woman, not two women or three women (hey, I live in Mormon country and it is really popular)!

One is MORE than enough! :rolleyes:

aefting
08-10-2003, 08:01 PM
Are you saying that it is okay to kill someone and pastor pastors and plant churches but it is not scriptural to pastor a church? That is what Paul did. I don't know. That's a good question. My first reaction is that Paul held the office of Apostle, an office with different qualifications than that of pastor or deacon. But I'm not sure, I'll have to think about this one a bit.

Andy

rlvaughn
08-10-2003, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by Molly:
I think divorce is looked upon too leniently today.Molly, I've seen the divorce/pastor question debated numerous times since I've joined the Baptist Board, with much of the same continuing disagreement. BUT, I believe most of us on both sides can agree that your statement quoted above is a wise one full of potent truth for our day.

Jimmy
08-10-2003, 10:20 PM
There is a good artical about this subject from a Biblical prospective at bible-truth.org (http://bible-truth.org)

John Wells
08-10-2003, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Molly:
based on the qualifications of above reproach and ruling his household. I think divorce is looked upen too leniently today.

What about a man who is divorced before his repentance and salvation....and then has a desire to preach/pastor? He was married,divorced,then saved later...now is married,is a godly husband and father,and meets all other requirements. Can he pastor?

What do you think?

Molly That is precisely the point I made in my previous post. To say that all manner of sins committed prior to becoming a new creation in Christ can be forgiven of a pastor except divorce, to repeat myself, creates the "second unpardonable sin!" :eek:

The whole point of Paul's passages of 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1:6 forward states that to be a worthy pastor, a man must have a proven record of successful spiritual leadership with his wife and children (if he is married). It makes since that if a man is not a successful spiritual leader with his intimate family, how on earth can he be a successful spiritual leader of a body of believers? If a man is not singularly and totally devoted to his wife, it undermines his entire spiritual authority and leadership abilities.

He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) (1 Timothy 3:4-5)
the husband of one wife. Lit. in Gr. a “one-woman man.” This says nothing about marriage or divorce (for comments on that, see note on v. 4). The issue is not the elder’s marital status, but his moral and sexual purity. This qualification heads the list, because it is in this area that leaders are most prone to fail. Various interpretations of this qualification have been offered. Some see it as a prohibition against polygamy—an unnecessary injunction since polygamy was not common in Roman society and clearly forbidden by Scripture (Gen 2:24), the teaching of Jesus (Matt. 19:5,6; Mark 10:6–9), and Paul (Eph. 5:31). A polygamist could not even have been a church member, let alone a church leader. Others see this requirement as barring those who remarried after the death of their wives. But, as already noted, the issue is sexual purity, not marital status. Further, the Bible encourages remarriage after widowhood (5:14; 1 Cor. 7:39). Some believe that Paul here excludes divorced men from church leadership. That again ignores the fact that this qualification does not deal with marital status. Nor does the Bible prohibit all remarriage after divorce (see notes on Matt. 5:31,32; 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:15). Finally, some think that this requirement excludes single men from church leadership. But if that were Paul’s intent, he would have disqualified himself (1 Cor. 7:8). A “one-woman man” is one totally devoted to his wife, maintaining singular devotion, affection and sexual purity in both thought and deed. To violate this is to forfeit blamelessness and no longer be “above reproach” MacArthur, J. J. (1997, c1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (1 Ti 3:2). Nashville: Word Pub.

Gunther
08-10-2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by John Wells:
[QB] That is precisely the point I made in my previous post. To say that all manner of sins committed prior to becoming a new creation in Christ can be forgiven of a pastor except divorce, to repeat myself, creates the "second unpardonable sin!"John, I would disagree here with you. Marriage was established by God without regard to a person's salvation. In other words, divorce is sin for everyone, not just believers. Of course divorce can be forgiven. However, if such a fella desired a role within the church, let him have at it, just not in the capacity of an overseer/elder or a deacon. He could be an evangelist, church planter, missionary, etc.

That doesn't make divorce an unpardonable sin; it means God is serious about those in leadership.

John Wells
08-10-2003, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
just not in the capacity of an overseer/elder or a deacon. He could be an evangelist, church planter, missionary, etc.

That doesn't make divorce an unpardonable sin; it means God is serious about those in leadership. So where does God's Word state a divorced man cannot be a pastor? Surely you don't cling to "the husband of (but) one wife?" The literal rendering, the Greek, and context do not even hint at that having to do with marital status.

Gunther
08-10-2003, 11:59 PM
John, I agree with the "one woman kind of man" understanding. That is what I have always believed.

However, a man who is completely devoted to one woman has not been divorced and then remarried. Further, the qualification of blameless would be violated. Finally, the "rules his own household well" clause is violated.

It fails on three grounds.

John Wells
08-11-2003, 12:11 AM
Not if his divorce was prior to his being born again, subsequent to a significant period of evidence of "putting off the old self" and becoming a new creation.

Gunther
08-11-2003, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by John Wells:
Not if his divorce was prior to his being born again, subsequent to a significant period of evidence of "putting off the old self" and becoming a new creation. John, prior to conversion has nothing to do with it. The pastorate is reserved for only a few christians, even though all are forgiven.

John Wells
08-11-2003, 08:20 AM
Gunther,

I would lean a little more toward believing your position if you could support it biblically. If the Apostle Paul (you and I for that matter) isn't excluded from pastorship due to his preconversion sins (persecuting and overseeing murder), then why this divorce thing that people have drummed up over the vague words of "husand of one wife?"

In Christ,
John

PastorGreg
08-11-2003, 09:07 AM
John, several have clearly stated that the issue is more with blamelessness and ruling his own house well than with husband of one wife. The position that divorce disqualifies a man from the pastorate does not make divorce an unpardonable sin, it just emphasizes the truth that even forgiven sin still bears consequences.
Dear old Dr. Weeks (whom Dr. Bob has spinning in his grave) taught that at salvation one can become a former alcoholic, a former murderer, etc., but even though the divorce is forgiven, one is still divorced.

John Wells
08-11-2003, 09:37 AM
PastorGreg,

Yes, and suppose the pastor in question has been doing that for 10-15 years since his divorce and subsequent conversion? These passages of Paul's speak of the condition of a non-recent regenerated man, not a particular error in the distant past.

My question remains unanswered, or maybe it is answered. The disqualification of a divorcee who is regenerated, called by God to the ministry (subjective as that is), and spurned by certain churches/denominations is due to church dogma of the pharisaic variety, and not sound biblical doctrine!

dianetavegia
08-11-2003, 09:44 AM
John, you have been answered. A preacher/ pastor/ deacon is held to a higher calling and higher moral standards. Blameless. His sin is forgiven but God says they must be held to certain standards which are higher than for a church member.

Maybe it's because a pastor is called upon to help save marriages and counsel in so many areas. If he is unable to control his own home, how can he be trusted to give good advice to other men? Just a rambling thought there... and not scripturally based.

I DO believe a divorced man can evangelize, even as a great speaker... but scripture tells me he cannot pastor a church. Maybe if more wonderful Christian men would speak to his brothers and share what they've learned, other men would not stray or fall into the same 'sin trap'.

Diane

John Wells
08-11-2003, 11:46 AM
dianetavegia: John, you have been answered.

Sorry to disagee Diane, but responded to and answered are two different things. Answered would be being shown scripturally where I am wrong.

dianetavegia: A preacher/ pastor/ deacon is held to a higher calling and higher moral standards. Blameless. His sin is forgiven but God says they must be held to certain standards which are higher than for a church member.

Agreed, but you take it further than scripture does by saying that prior to regeneration a man cannot have made this one mistake. He can have made all sorts of others, but not this one. That is absurdly rediculous!

dianetavegia: Maybe it's because a pastor is called upon to help save marriages and counsel in so many areas. If he is unable to control his own home, how can he be trusted to give good advice to other men? Just a rambling thought there... and not scripturally based.

I believe I have answered this several times over. We are talking about failings in the distant past, and a proven track record of sound spiritual family leadership after regeneration.

dianetavegia: I DO believe a divorced man can evangelize, even as a great speaker... but scripture tells me he cannot pastor a church. Maybe if more wonderful Christian men would speak to his brothers and share what they've learned, other men would not stray or fall into the same 'sin trap'.

Please tell me, Diane, where scripture tells you that? :confused: Where does it say that a man who has, in the distant past, fallen from those higher standards, now having been regenerated and living the example of a regenerated family spiritual leader for many years, is forever disqualified to be a pastor? The Bible doesn't teach this. It is dogma and pharisaic emotionalism! I agree with PastorGreg and others that forgiven sin often carries lifelong consequences, but the Bible does not say that permanent disqualification of pastorship is one of them! ;)

Gunther
08-11-2003, 11:55 AM
The issue is not about forgiveness. It never has been.

Paul was not a pastor. He never claimed to be. He was a frontier missionary who planted churches. Because of his apostleship, he had authority.

Remember when John the Baptist accused Herod of being an adulterer because he married his brothers wife? Did the marriage laws apply to Herod or was John misguided?

John Wells
08-11-2003, 12:02 PM
Gunther,

Must we go round and round with bad examples? Herod was a practicing, unrepentant adulterer. You do see the distinction between him and the theoretical pastor we are discussing . . . don't you? :confused:

Peruse this for some interesting feedback. Note the responses of notable theologians!
http://www.gospelcenterchurch.org/divorcedpastors.html

and . . .

http://www.baptistlife.com/flick/rethinking.htm

John Wells
08-11-2003, 12:19 PM
Another point! Those on the other side of this debate from me seem to naturally assume that a "never divorced" pastor is a successful spiritual leader of his family. It is notorious (many jokes attest to this) for pastor's kids to be the most unruly kids in the church :eek: There are many previously divorced pastors (12% according to a Barna study) who are better spritual leaders than some of their never divorced counterparts.

The unconditional barring of divorced men as pastors is neither biblical nor practical. It is a pharisaic, dogmatic standard and not a biblical standard. I can think of far worse never divorced pastors to submit my authority to than Charles Stanley, for example! ;)

"Many of the same preachers who scream vehemently against Divorced preachers and deacons hold a Scofield Bible high in the air and wave it backwards and forth. I wonder if they know that Dr. Scofield was divorced and remarried?" - from above linked article! :eek:

Gunther
08-11-2003, 12:19 PM
John, I was only pointing out that marriage laws extend beyond believers.

Of course I see a difference between Herod and the prospective pastor. My point doesn't change. If John the Baptist could apply a law (taken from the Law of Moses) to an unsaved gentile, then it carries over. Remarriage and the like would also be wrong (unless death had occurred in the other spouse).

John Wells
08-11-2003, 12:24 PM
Gunther,

Compare your statement with Matt. 5:31,32; 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:15 and let God's Word be our guide and judge! ;)

Gunther
08-11-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by John Wells:
Gunther,

Compare your statement with Matt. 5:31,32; 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:15 and let God's Word be our guide and judge! ;) Are those the only passages on divorce? Besides, now you are the one who has not dealt with the issue and have tried to bring in other issues.

Besides, I would not want Stanley as my pastor. It is primarily theological reasons, but that is another point. If he had good theology, he would be welcome to preach, teach, and do a whole host of things. Pastoring is not one of them. That is not pharisaical.

Ease up a bit John.

If you want to talk about divorce and remarriage, please start another thread.

John Wells
08-11-2003, 01:34 PM
Gunther: Are those the only passages on divorce? Besides, now you are the one who has not dealt with the issue and have tried to bring in other issues.

The topic is “Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher?” What issue(s) have I not dealt with? What “other issues” that have no relevance have I brought in? Straw man tactic duly noted!

Gunther: Besides, I would not want Stanley as my pastor.

You are certainly entitled to that!

Gunther: Ease up a bit John.

I refuse to “ease up” on biblical errancy. If you insist on holding to it, fine, but don’t ask me to place scales over my eyes! :eek:

Gunther: If you want to talk about divorce and remarriage, please start another thread. “Remember when John the Baptist accused Herod of being an adulterer because he married his brothers wife? Did the marriage laws apply to Herod or was John misguided?”

Er, uh, I believe I have been debating the subject and it is perhaps you who should start the other thread! :eek:

dianetavegia
08-11-2003, 02:54 PM
I find NO scripture that says a man who was divorced before his conversion is eligible to be a pastor. Just as you ask us for scripture that says he CANNOT be a pastor (which I feel we provided) .... I ask you for scripture that says he CAN.

Mal 2:16
"For the Lord God of Israel says That He hates divorce, For it covers one's garment with violence," Says the Lord of hosts. "Therefore take heed to your spirit, That you do not deal treacherously."

De 22:
28 "If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

Mt 19:8
He said to them, "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.

1 Co 7: But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife...... 12 But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. 13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.

Matthew 5:32
but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19:9
"And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Refreshed
08-11-2003, 03:09 PM
It all comes down to this. Though you are forgiven if you ask of the Lord, there many times are still consequences to be paid.

Jason

Jimmy C
08-11-2003, 03:18 PM
Here is a situation our Deacon body actually had to deal with.

We did not ordain divorced men, although I thought we should, especially when the man was divorced prior to becoming a christian. But when a man came to us who acknowledged having a child out of wedlock it put us in a difficult postion.

Another difficult decision for us today, do you ask a man if he has ever had relations with a woman other than his wife - if so would he not be seen in the eyes of the lord as married to the other woman? What about prior to conversion?

My prediciton is that this situation would be quite thorny, that is if you were to get truthful answers from your prospective pastors. And how would you go about asking the question?

Elijah
08-11-2003, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by John Wells:
Another point! Those on the other side of this debate from me seem to naturally assume that a "never divorced" pastor is a successful spiritual leader of his family. It is notorious (many jokes attest to this) for pastor's kids to be the most unruly kids in the church :eek: There are many previously divorced pastors (12% according to a Barna study) who are better spritual leaders than some of their never divorced counterparts.

The unconditional barring of divorced men as pastors is neither biblical nor practical. It is a pharisaic, dogmatic standard and not a biblical standard. I can think of far worse never divorced pastors to submit my authority to than Charles Stanley, for example! ;)

"Many of the same preachers who scream vehemently against Divorced preachers and deacons hold a Scofield Bible high in the air and wave it backwards and forth. I wonder if they know that Dr. Scofield was divorced and remarried?" - from above linked article! :eek: Amen Brother
This issue hits home with me on a personal level, as I am a man who many years ago went through a divorce. many in the baptist church make me and others who have been through this ordeal into second class Christians good for nothing more than filling a pew graemlins/tear.gif (I thank God that He didnt look at me that way).I have now been married for 10 years and have 2 wonderfull children, and serve in the position of a Pastor in a Baptist church. It hasnt been an easy road at times, but God called me to this ministry and I intend to fulfill my calling. (I did by the way have scriptural reasons for my divorce.) One thing that I have noticed concerning this, There are several clear qualifications for bishop, deacon, etc., the most vague is "the husband of one wife", yet it seems to be the only qualification that those on the other side of this look at. We must be carefull to let the bible say what it says, but let us not make the bible say what we want it to say. I on the other hand, plan on preaching Jesus next sunday and the sunday after that and so on, until He calls me home. ;)

Elijah
08-11-2003, 03:41 PM
[.

The unconditional barring of divorced men as pastors is neither biblical nor practical. It is a pharisaic, dogmatic standard and not a biblical standard. I can think of far worse never divorced pastors to submit my authority to than Charles Stanley, for example! ;)

"Many of the same preachers who scream vehemently against Divorced preachers and deacons hold a Scofield Bible high in the air and wave it backwards and forth. I wonder if they know that Dr. Scofield was divorced and remarried?" - from above linked article! :eek: [/QB][/QUOTE]

And I thank the Lord that Charles Stanley did not step down from his "CALLING". I get much inspiration from his preaching. I believe that we would be losing a powerfull voice for Christ had he left his pulpit.

John Wells
08-11-2003, 04:06 PM
Diane,

Woman (in Jesus' loving terms! :D ), why do you exasperate me! :D

I do not dispute any of your scripture references. God hates divorce. It is wrong. God hates sin. It is wrong. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. All pastors have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. If far enough in the past, especially prior to conversion, does the Bible state that there are any sins that disqualify one from pastorship? NOooooooo! You won't find it in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1 or anywhere else in the Bible.

Can a divorced pastor/deacon be a "husband of one wife" (one-man woman)? - Yes!

Can a divorced pastor be a good spiritual leader of his family (wife and children as 1 Tim 3 requires)? - Yes! One failure in the distant past being a permanent disqualifier IS NOT TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE! It may have been taught in your church, but it is not biblical.

What you need for your case, Diane, is a scripture verse that says "no man may divorce his wife and be a pastor," or "no man may ever have failed as his family's spiritual leader and be a pastor." Short of that, you have gone extra-biblical! ;)

gb93433
08-11-2003, 10:18 PM
For those of you who believe a man who is divorced cannot pastor I would like to get your response to the following historical practice.

Historically when a person broke the engagement (betrothal) a divorce must be granted for the engagement to be broken legally. The engagement was a promise of marriage with a contract being drawn up and money exchanged. The money was given by the man to the woman's family to be kept in case he divorced his wife. It was for her support should she be left without any support. Divorce pertained to both a marriage and the engagement. So it took a divorce to break a marriage and it also took a divorvce to break an engagement.

I would contend that anyone who believes that a pastor may not have been divorced must also support the point that he must not have broken an angagement as well.

dianetavegia
08-11-2003, 10:26 PM
John Wells, I like you SO much that I wish I COULD agree with you. In fact, I'm not sure we've ever disagreed on anything else! LOL

However, the qualifications speak to me that this husband of one wife is a forever thing... except for death, of course.

I think you must be one of the nicest people I've ever disagreed with! Now if EVERYONE were as polite as you!!!!!

Diane

John Wells
08-11-2003, 10:48 PM
Diane,

I agree that we can end this by disageeing. You also are an extremely nice lady and Sister in Christ.

Let this be my last thrust that you might see this in a different light. I presume that you love your current pastor. I know nothing about him, age, length of time being a pastor, etc. But what if his wife just flipped out, had a stroke, or whatever, and out of the clear blue demanded a divorce for no reason, and persisted until she got it through the courts?

Now by your ruling, your beloved pastor would have to end his God called ministry as a pastor, at least at your church! Don't say that would never happen. Let's pray that it doesn't, but anything's possible. It could!

Peace and blessings Diane!
John

Gunther
08-11-2003, 11:55 PM
This mythical, mystical "calling" has justified so many bad preachers and pastors that it is sickening. Take Jack Hyles for example.

Sincere
08-12-2003, 09:08 AM
Although, divorce seems to be an in thing as Christians we know that this is not something to take lightly. We should not allow our beliefs to take over scripture when it comes to things like this because that's why so many churches are being misled.

Scripture tells us that there are two allowable reasons for divorce (adultry and if an unbelieving spouse abandons and divorces a believing spouse) and that anything else is a sin, but it is also a forgiveable sin if genuinely repented and not repeated.

I have not seen it anywhere in scripture that a divorced man can not be a pastor. I'm sure there are a lot of other things in a lot of many pastors past that are not pleasing to God, but He calls on them preach. It's not up to us to decide who preaches. If a person is truly blessed with the annointing to preach we believers will be able to discern if they are in the spirit or not.

I'm a firm believer that you can't preach or teach what you don't know, and to hold someone accountable for their past is wrong, Christians should live for today. Satan only dwells on the past to keep people down. graemlins/love2.gif

Paul of Eugene
08-12-2003, 10:48 AM
I've always held the view that when the scripture says a pastor should be the husband of one wife, it meant one wife right now. That's the plain reading of what the Bible says.

Over the years I'm glad to see more and more people taking the plain reading of what the Bible says over the traditions of men as to what the Bible says.

Elijah
08-12-2003, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
This mythical, mystical "calling" has justified so many bad preachers and pastors that it is sickening. Take Jack Hyles for example. You are absolutely right,,,to a point. It is a sad fact that there are many false teachers and preachers that claim to be called by God, they deceive people and often times get rich doing so. However the True calling of God is neither "mythical" nor "mystical", but it is very much supernatural. So that being said, how do we discern the wheat from the chaff; Matt,7:15-20 tells us that its by their fruits that we we will
know them, and that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. graemlins/thumbs.gif

Johnv
08-13-2003, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by dianetavegia:
My church does not allow a divorced man or a man married to a divorced woman to be a pastor or a deacon. We feel scripture that says 'husband of one wife' (not one at a time) covers this qualification quite well.Then, do you exclude single men from being pastor? What about widowed men? What about widowed and remarried men?

This verse has nothing to do with divorce, it has to do with polygamy.

John Wells
08-14-2003, 11:44 AM
Johnv,

Actually, although we agree on the conclusion that these passages do not prohibit a pastor from having been divorced, a historical look at Palestine during Paul's time will reveal that polygamy was practically non-existant. It had been a real problem prior to the Babylonian exile, but tapered off from the return. Roman occupation further frowned upon the practice.
Our position can successfully be argued, in context, as giving examples (not 100% inclusive, but merely some examples) of what is meant to be held "blameless." ;)

amixedupmom
08-14-2003, 03:58 PM
Actually yes he can be. To anyone. You cannot expect your pastor to be perfect. And, his past has nothing to do with his ministy. We ALL have pasts and, would rather that those things be left there. I know I do. I don't understand why a divorced man cannot be. I'm sorry if my opinion rattles the nerves of others. smile.gif

God Bless smile.gif

Paul of Eugene
08-14-2003, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by John Wells:
Johnv,

Actually, although we agree on the conclusion that these passages do not prohibit a pastor from having been divorced, a historical look at Palestine during Paul's time will reveal that polygamy was practically non-existant. It had been a real problem prior to the Babylonian exile, but tapered off from the return. Roman occupation further frowned upon the practice.
Our position can successfully be argued, in context, as giving examples (not 100% inclusive, but merely some examples) of what is meant to be held "blameless." ;) uhh - John - didn't Paul's ministry and the audience addressed by his letters have a slightly wider context than Palestine? :rolleyes:

John Wells
08-14-2003, 05:00 PM
OK Paul, the same applies to Asia Minor, Greece, Italy! Did I leave anything out? In case I did, the same applies to ___________. ;)

Paul of Eugene
08-15-2003, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by John Wells:
OK Paul, the same applies to Asia Minor, Greece, Italy! Did I leave anything out? In case I did, the same applies to ___________. ;) Well, I'm sure you would agree that having more than one wife, rare that it might have been, was not completely unheard of. Bigamy was not a crime and therefore would occur from time to time.

John Wells
08-15-2003, 02:34 PM
Paul,

Agreed. The point is however, the context of 1 Tim 3. Verse two says, "An overseer (bishop), then, must be above reproach (blameless)." NASB (KJV). So let's turn these verses into a list:

Blameless
Husband of one wife
Temperate
Prudent
Respectable
Hospitable
Able to teach
Not addicted to wine
Pugnacious
Gentle
Peaceable
Free from the love of money
Manages his household well
Keeps his children under control (with dignity)

Verse five says, “but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?” All of these attributes of “blameless” point to the man’s character and fruits as evidence of successful spiritual leadership of his family. They all speak to the present “fruits” of the man! With that in mind, tell me which one of these fits better with the rest:

- A one-woman, devoted to his wife, man
- A man who has never been divorced

gb93433
08-15-2003, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by gb93433:
For those of you who believe a man who is divorced cannot pastor I would like to get your response to the following historical practice.

Historically when a person broke the engagement (betrothal) a divorce must be granted for the engagement to be broken legally. The engagement was a promise of marriage with a contract being drawn up and money exchanged. The money was given by the man to the woman's family to be kept in case he divorced his wife. It was for her support should she be left without any support. Divorce pertained to both a marriage and the engagement. So it took a divorce to break a marriage and it also took a divorvce to break an engagement.

I would contend that anyone who believes that a pastor may not have been divorced must also support the point that he must not have broken an engagement as well. I find it interesting that there were no responses to the previous post.

Paul of Eugene
08-18-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by John Wells:
With that in mind, tell me which one of these fits better with the rest:

- A one-woman, devoted to his wife, man
- A man who has never been divorced [/QB]Oh, I'm with you a hundred percent on the application of this issue. The man may have been divorced in the past or may not but his present marriage needs to show the fruits of a spiritual life and show the appropriate loving faithful relationship a marriage is supposed to have. Anything less and he is not a suitable candidate for the ministry.

dianetavegia
08-18-2003, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by gb93433:

Historically when a person broke the engagement (betrothal) a divorce must be granted for the engagement to be broken legally. The engagement was a promise of marriage with a contract being drawn up and money exchanged. The money was given by the man to the woman's family to be kept in case he divorced his wife. It was for her support should she be left without any support. Divorce pertained to both a marriage and the engagement. So it took a divorce to break a marriage and it also took a divorvce to break an engagement.
It is MY understanding that this form of engagement included the couple living together as husband and wife only awaiting the actual ceremony. If the girl was found to not be a virgin, she could be divorced or put away. Therefore, engagement at that time included sexual relations.

Diane

John Wells
08-18-2003, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
[QUOTE]Oh, I'm with you a hundred percent on the application of this issue. The man may have been divorced in the past or may not but his present marriage needs to show the fruits of a spiritual life and show the appropriate loving faithful relationship a marriage is supposed to have. Anything less and he is not a suitable candidate for the ministry.And I have echoed those same words somewhere on one of the four (dizzY) threads going on this right now! So we agree! graemlins/thumbs.gif

showard93
08-23-2003, 12:03 AM
Not in my church and personally I would never attend a church where a divorced man pastored. I sure don't think divorced people are second class I just think they disqualify themselves.

Lacy Evans
08-24-2003, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
Not in my church and personally I would never attend a church where a divorced man pastored. I sure don't think divorced people are second class I just think they disqualify themselves. Would you submit to a man who committed manslaughter? What if 40 years ago he got drunk and ran off the road and killed his wife in a wreck?

What if he had been of another religion (say Moslem), his wife was converted to Christianity and he killed her. (Paul persecuted Christians) Then he had a miraculous salvation and served God for years, married a godly Christian woman, raised obedient, godly children and was called to preach? Would you submit to a pastor who 40 years ago killed his wife but not one who divorced her? After all, her death biblically "ended" the previous marriage.

Every qualification on the list in I Timothy 3 refers to how a man is behaving now and how he has behaved in the recent, observable past. It doesn't say, "having ALWAYS been blameless, having ALWAYS been sober, having ALWAYS been of good behaviour, having ALWAYS been given to hospitality, having ALWAYS been apt to teach, having ALWAYS been not given to wine", etc. but you and others add to the scripture and insert "having ALWAYS been" to the phrase, "the husband of one wife." You cannot ignore context when interpreting scripture

If Biblical divorce ends the marriage for anyone, (Jn 4:17,18) it ends the marriage for prospective elders too. I have ONLY ONE WIFE! (Jesus says, "Thou hast well said") No one on this earth hates divorce more than me. I wouldn't wish it on Osama Bin Laden. But the narrow, twisted interpretation of the phrase "husband of one wife" to mean "having NEVER been divorced" is not supported by one single scripture.

I know several men who lost their wives to divorce because they WERE ruling his own household. MANY women leave BECAUSE the man is living too holy. When a person gets ready to rebel, it's nobody's fault but their own.

Could God be your Pastor?

Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Lacy Evans

showard93
08-24-2003, 11:11 PM
Wewll first of all I still say that means one living wife, not one at the time. When my parents divorced if my dad would have remarried he would have had 2 living wives. That is what I beleive and I beleive that God meant marriage to be one man/ one woman for one lifetime.

I know someone who had Godly parents and this lady married what she thought was a Godly man. After they were married and the had a small baby he committed adultrey and there marriage ended in divorce. That has been 10 years now and he has remarried but she doesn't feel like she has grounds to remarry. She has grounds for a divorce but not to remarry. Now you might ask is that fair and I will hve to say no it is not and she has had alot of lonely nights but God has so blessed her for doing right.

I hope I never face this kind of thing because I love married life but I also want to do what is right and I would want a man of God to be what the Bible says he should be to be a Pastor.

I hope all this makes sence because I sure went on and on enough ;)

Taufgesinnter
08-24-2003, 11:37 PM
Lacy--Bad example, because both manslaughter and divorce are one-time sins and can be forgiven if repented of. The blamelessness of a bishop doubtless applies to his Christian life, not his pre-salvation life.

A pastor who divorced and is remarried is living in a continuous state of unrepentant adultery. If he would repent of that sin and be forgiven, he must forsake committing the adultery.

Lacy Evans
08-25-2003, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Lacy--Bad example, because both manslaughter and divorce are one-time sins and can be forgiven if repented of. The blamelessness of a bishop doubtless applies to his Christian life, not his pre-salvation life.

A pastor who divorced and is remarried is living in a continuous state of unrepentant adultery. If he would repent of that sin and be forgiven, he must forsake committing the adultery. I fail to see where we disagree. I agree that bith sins can be repented of. That was my point. But a pastor or anybody else who is scripturally divorced (His wife fornicated or was unsaved and left him) is not living in adultry if remarried (I Cor 7:15), nor is he guilty of ANY sin if he was an innocent party in the divorce. Divorce is not a sin. Divorce "saving for the cause of fornication" is a sin. Matthew 19:8 says that it has been that way "From the beginning"!

The issue is, "Does God recognize divorce?" The overwhelming evidence of scripture is that he does in at least two situations. A woman who fornicates breaks the marriage covenant. In fact in the Old Testament she was to be stoned. (That would make things much more simple today but it wouldn't be very Christian)If in the eyes of God the marriage is ended (John 4:17,18) then the man now has NO wives. If he remarries he now has ONE wife!

The simple reading is "husband of one wife". It just means what it says.

In Christ, Lacy

Taufgesinnter
08-25-2003, 12:56 PM
Yes, but the fornication exception clause doesn't apply to us because we don't have the Jewish betrothal custom to which it applied. And if an unbeliever leaves the believer is to remain as though unmarried or be reconciled.

Johnv
08-25-2003, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Yes, but the fornication exception clause doesn't apply to us because we don't have the Jewish betrothal custom to which it applied. And if an unbeliever leaves the believer is to remain as though unmarried or be reconciled. In Jewish custom, betrothal is not engagement. Betrothal is the peroid between the wedding and the establishment of a permanent residence together. Whether or not they've established a home, they're still husband and wife. A bill of divorcement has no bearing on whether or not the married couple had established a home together.

Johnv
08-25-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
... that means one living wife, not one at the time. When my parents divorced if my dad would have remarried he would have had 2 living wives. That is what I beleive and I beleive that God meant marriage to be one man/ one woman for one lifetime...Biblically marriage is a covenant. When the covenant is broken, it ceases to exist. A husband and wife are no longer husband and wife when their covenant has been broken for biblical reasons (adultery and abandonment). A pastor should not be penalized if his wife broke the covenant.

showard93
08-25-2003, 02:32 PM
Just a few verses and the reason I beleive that being a husband of one wife doesn't mean 1 wife at a time but one wife only.

Mark10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put assunder.

Mark10:11-12 And he saith unto them, whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
And if a woman shall put away her husband and be married to another, she committed adultrey.

Now this is Jesus talking and I beleive he still means one man and one woman for one lifetime...even if the woman leaves the husband he is still disqualified if they get a divorce.

Johnv
08-25-2003, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
...even if the woman leaves the husband he is still disqualified if they get a divorce.
The reference "What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put assunder" Is not a reference to "husband of one wife". It's a warning to men not to break the covenant of marriage. When one leaves another in adultery, they have broken the covenant, and as such, the covenant no longer exists.

Men and women break the covenant all the time, while God keeps the covenant. (for example, leaving a mariage because you "got bored" with your partner, or you were no onger "in love" with your partner). However, the marital covenant is biblically broken in cases of adultery or abandonment. When the covenant is biblically broken, God is no longer part of that covenant. In these cases, I see no biblical reason why a divorced pastor cannot continue on the pulpit. One might as well also say that a widowed man may not be pastor, or that a single man may not be pastor (since Paul was single, I'd doubt that's what he meant).

Lacy Evans
08-26-2003, 01:36 AM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Yes, but the fornication exception clause doesn't apply to us because we don't have the Jewish betrothal custom to which it applied. And if an unbeliever leaves the believer is to remain as though unmarried or be reconciled. That is an interesting theory and I've heard it many times and seen it offered as "proof" on this board. If you can prove it, I would be interested. I am afraid that many who use this argument are arguing from personal bias and not from scripture. In reality it can't be proven without "going to the Greek". In my Bible the word "fornication" comes from the word (in the original English) "fornication" and it means, "fornication" (-Sex between two people who are not married to each other). Adultry is the second definition in Webster 1828. (Look it up)

There is absolutely No hint of betrothal in the context.

Why did no one answer my question, "Would you submit to a pastor who had once (Many years ago) killed a wife?" Does being a repentant wife-murderer disqualify one from the ministry? Where does it say that if it does? Does it show more control of his household if he killed her than if he just divorced her? Forgive my sarcasm. I'm just trying to make a point.

Two brothers grow up in a small West Texas town. They were both as wild as march hares, drinking, doing dope, fornicating, etc. In the process of their life of sin they begin to date two sisters. Both girls soon turn up pregnant. Brother number one splits the scene and isn't heard from for ten years. He never pays a dime of child support. He continues on in his sinful ways and never marries.. Brother number two feels convicted and marries his girlfriend. The marriage lasts about a year and ends in divorce. Fast forward. Both brothers have been saved for 10-15 years now, serving God in a mighty way and living holy. Both brothers have made ammends with the sisters and made it right with their children. But because both are married to different women they cannot mary the sisters. Brother number one (Who did the pregnant sister so dirty and continued in his fornication till salvation) only married once and IS qualified. Brother number two (Who at least had the decency to try to make an honest woman out of the sister) has been married twice and is NOT qualified.

Lacy Evans

Taufgesinnter
08-26-2003, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Yes, but the fornication exception clause doesn't apply to us because we don't have the Jewish betrothal custom to which it applied. And if an unbeliever leaves the believer is to remain as though unmarried or be reconciled. That is an interesting theory and I've heard it many times and seen it offered as "proof" on this board. If you can prove it, I would be interested. I am afraid that many who use this argument are arguing from personal bias and not from scripture. In reality it can't be proven without "going to the Greek". In my Bible the word "fornication" comes from the word (in the original English) "fornication" and it means, "fornication" (-Sex between two people who are not married to each other). Adultry is the second definition in Webster 1828. (Look it up)

There is absolutely No hint of betrothal in the context. </font>[/QUOTE]Well I'm not one of them. I'm arguing from Scripture because my personal bias would not be to say that my parents lived in adultery for 25 years. My personal bias, living according to the flesh, would be to accept divorce and remarriage because it would please the flesh, especially if I ended up in an unhappy marriage or my wife left me.

Porneia means all kinds of sexual immorality when used in its broad sense; it means sex between two people who are both unmarried when used in its narrowest sense. Unless clear by context, porneia generally has its broader sense. When used in contradistinction to a more specific word such as moicheia (adultery), its range is restricted to its narrow sense. This is shown in the NT where fornication is listed alongside adultery, which would be redundant if fornication were being used in its broad sense.

As for the context, the betrothal custom is entirely within the Jewish context--which is why the so-called Matthean exception clauses are not included in the parallel passages in the other gospels. This is further corroborated by the ability of women to get a divorce in the parallel accounts, which was denied Jewish women under OT law and not included in the Matthean account.

As for "proving" this theory, neither it nor any of the competing theories interpreting the Matthean exceptions can be "proved," except perhaps beyond a reasonable doubt by a preponderance of the evidence. Obviously, I'm persuaded by the evidence that the reading that is not as easy on the flesh is correct: the one consistent with the Markan and Lucan parallels.

Johnv
08-27-2003, 01:48 PM
The issue of pastorship aside, it's intersting that so many are presuming that a divorced person who remarries is an adulterer.

Take my own example: My marriage ended when my wife left me to shack up with another man. Adultery biblically allowed me to get a divorce. But it turns out that it was my wife who sought to divorce me after living in adultery for over two years. So here I am, a divorced man, who was a Christian before my divorce and am one now. Several years pass, and lo, God had put before me a wonderful Christian woman. Now Paul says very clearly that being single is perfectly noble. However, he also says that if a man has sexual desires, it is better for him to marry. Well, I'm a man, and I have sexual, emotional, and covanental desires. I plan on marrying again in God's time. I have the biblical support directly from Paul. If I marry again, I won't be an adulterer. Why should it be different for a pastor?

showard93
08-27-2003, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
The issue of pastorship aside, it's intersting that so many are presuming that a divorced person who remarries is an adulterer.

Take my own example: My marriage ended when my wife left me to shack up with another man. Adultery biblically allowed me to get a divorce. But it turns out that it was my wife who sought to divorce me after living in adultery for over two years. So here I am, a divorced man, who was a Christian before my divorce and am one now. Several years pass, and lo, God had put before me a wonderful Christian woman. Now Paul says very clearly that being single is perfectly noble. However, he also says that if a man has sexual desires, it is better for him to marry. Well, I'm a man, and I have sexual, emotional, and covanental desires. I plan on marrying again in God's time. I have the biblical support directly from Paul. If I marry again, I won't be an adulterer. Why should it be different for a pastor? The problem is when you remarry. The bible does say you have grounds to divorce when there is adultrey but there is never grounds to remarry unless your spouse dies. I know it doesn't seem fair but if you are a preacher then if your wife leaves you and you divorce then you should not remarry unless you are willing to step down.

Johnv
08-27-2003, 06:23 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
The problem is when you remarry. The bible does say you have grounds to divorce when there is adultrey but there is never grounds to remarry unless your spouse dies.
It would be difficult to align that with Paul when he says not to suffer a man to remain unmarried if he desires a woman sexually. My marriage ended out of no sin of my own. I don't have a wife, as God's covenant with her and me no longer exists. Hence, me marrying now would not be ungodly or sinful. And, if I were a pastor, I'd still be the husband of one wife.

Lacy Evans
08-27-2003, 11:02 PM
[/QB][/QUOTE]As for the context, the betrothal custom is entirely within the Jewish context--which is why the so-called Matthean exception clauses are not included in the parallel passages in the other gospels. This is further corroborated by the ability of women to get a divorce in the parallel accounts, which was denied Jewish women under OT law and not included in the Matthean account.

As for "proving" this theory, neither it nor any of the competing theories interpreting the Matthean exceptions can be "proved," except perhaps beyond a reasonable doubt by a preponderance of the evidence. Obviously, I'm persuaded by the evidence that the reading that is not as easy on the flesh is correct: the one consistent with the Markan and Lucan parallels. [/QB][/QUOTE]


Brother,
Very well presented. Thank you so much for not entering into the hateful type of dialogue that often shows up on these boards. You have consistently stayed away from subjective, emotional phrases and I appreciate the spirit in which you debate.

When I ask for proof, I merely mean scriptural support. It seems to me that you have a theory explaining a plain scripture, rather than a plain scripture explaining a theory. You build a very good case for "Betrothal" (if the thing is scriptural in the first place.) The following verses show clearly the the motives for God's divorcing of Israel are abandonment and ADULTRY. Nothing about a betrothal period in the word adultry.

KJV Jeremiah 3:6-8
6 The Lord said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.
7 And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it.
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Surely God does not hold his people to a higher standard than he does Himself!

Adultry is a specific type of fornication. But fornication would include other forms such as beastiality, sodomy, pornography, etc. These sins would certainly be grounds for divorce even though they are not technically "adultry". As I said before there is nothing in the context to even hint of a betrothal period "fornication". I realize that Matthew contains truth that other gospels don't but we can't jump at the hyper-dispensationalist notion that Matthew is only applicable to the Jews. Instead we should take the Bible in its totality. There are four gospels for a reason. Only by reading all four, for example, can we find the complete inscription on the cross, "This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews."

In Christ Lacy

Lacy Evans
08-27-2003, 11:21 PM
Many Godly men have been faced with the ultimatum from their wives, "Leave the ministry or lose me!" We ought to obey God rather than men. If we forsake a sister, a father, children, our own life, etc. we are praised. But if we forsake a wife for my [Christ's] name's sake, we are in sin. Could someone please explain the following verses in which God guarantees PREMIUM rewards for one who forsakes his wife for the kingdom's sake. (And please don't tell me that "forsake" and "left" means that she died.) (Also remember that the Bible has no notion of what America calls "legal separation.") If "Left" and "Forsaken" do not mean "Divorced", then what do they mean?

KJV Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

KJV Matthew 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

KJV Mark 10:29-30
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

KJV Luke 18:29-30
29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.

pinoybaptist
08-28-2003, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by Johnv:
Yes. unlike drunkenness and adultery, divorce is not a sin, unless done for sinful reasons. Sorry, Johnv. My Bible says divorce is a sin.


I Cor. 7:10-11 says 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.

1 Cor. 7:39 - The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth....

Ephesians 5:25 - Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it....

Matthew 19:6 - Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Malachi 2:15b-16a - Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away [divorce].

There are no unsinful reasons for divorce.

pinoybaptist
08-28-2003, 01:28 AM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
Many Godly men have been faced with the ultimatum from their wives, "Leave the ministry or lose me!" We ought to obey God rather than men. If we forsake a sister, a father, children, our own life, etc. we are praised. But if we forsake a wife for my [Christ's] name's sake, we are in sin. Could someone please explain the following verses in which God guarantees PREMIUM rewards for one who forsakes his wife for the kingdom's sake. (And please don't tell me that "forsake" and "left" means that she died.) (Also remember that the Bible has no notion of what America calls "legal separation.") If "Left" and "Forsaken" do not mean "Divorced", then what do they mean?

KJV Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

KJV Matthew 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

KJV Mark 10:29-30
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

KJV Luke 18:29-30
29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. These verses are not encouraging the break up of families and the abandonment of responsibilities by husbands to their wives and children so they can serve Jesus and God's Kingdom.

After all, God was the one who instituted the family back in the Garden of Eden, and commanded the Israelites to teach His ways and His words to their children when the stand up, when they lie down, when they sit down to eat..(Deut.6:6-9).

Those verses are saying instead that Jesus must have the pre-eminence in the lives of those who profess to know him, to follow him, to obey him, and to believe him, otherwise, all those professings are just "hot air" and chest thumpings. No substance at all.

pinoybaptist
08-28-2003, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by dianetavegia:
Let's discuss this remark. Can a divorced man be a pastor in YOUR church or a pastor to YOU?

Diane [/QB]Yes. I mean, if he was divorced before God called him into the ministry.

BUT if he gets divorced while already pastoring ? Out the door I go.

Johnv
08-28-2003, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by pinoybaptist:
Sorry, Johnv. My Bible says divorce is a sin... There are no unsinful reasons for divorce. ADULTERY - In Matthew 5:31, Jesus says that God does not allow divorce except in cases of "porneia" which is a greek word most often translated as "marital unfaithfulness."

ABANDONMENT - In 1 Corinthians 7:15, we read that if one spouse abandons the other, that the one who remains is no longer bound by the marital covenant, and divorce is permitted. Abandonment would be a departure from the family, with clear intentions not to return.

ABUSE - The third issue, abuse, is more difficult to demonstrate with a Bible verse. With God's clear heart for the oppressed and the abused throughout the Bible, I find it hard to maintain any understanding of words like "justice" and "love" if God directed a woman who was being physically abused to remain in that situation. I think there are few things more heinous than a man who physically abuses a woman. However, when abuse become the norm in a marriage, it becomes clear that, while the abuser is there physically, he has nonetheless abandoned his spouse, and, as set forth above, abandonment is a clear reason for marriage to end.

I would also suggest that a pattern of child abuse would constitute grounds for divorce. Such action, in my view, shatters the marriage covenant at its foundation.

With these things said, healing can happen in any marriage and in any heart, as God hates divorce because it destroys lives. But that must begin with the repentance of the one who did the abusing, adultery, or abandoning. Without that repentance, the perpetrator cannot overcome the sins that shatterred the marriage. Unless they have been overcome, there is no healing. Unless they have been healed, there is no marriage.

Taufgesinnter
08-29-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
The problem is when you remarry. The bible does say you have grounds to divorce when there is adultrey but there is never grounds to remarry unless your spouse dies. I know it doesn't seem fair but if you are a preacher then if your wife leaves you and you divorce then you should not remarry unless you are willing to step down. Wow, very biblical answer, showard93.

Taufgesinnter
08-29-2003, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by showard93:
The problem is when you remarry. The bible does say you have grounds to divorce when there is adultrey but there is never grounds to remarry unless your spouse dies.
It would be difficult to align that with Paul when he says not to suffer a man to remain unmarried if he desires a woman sexually. My marriage ended out of no sin of my own. I don't have a wife, as God's covenant with her and me no longer exists. Hence, me marrying now would not be ungodly or sinful. And, if I were a pastor, I'd still be the husband of one wife. </font>[/QUOTE]Since a marriage covenant ends only when one spouse dies, if God's covenant with you two no longer exists, then of course you are free to remarry, being a widower.

Johnv
08-29-2003, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Since a marriage covenant ends only when one spouse dies, if God's covenant with you two no longer exists, then of course you are free to remarry, being a widower. It doesn't only end when a spouse dies. The covenant is broken by adultery and abandonment. A divorce is a public recognition that the marital covenant has ended.

Taufgesinnter
08-29-2003, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Since a marriage covenant ends only when one spouse dies, if God's covenant with you two no longer exists, then of course you are free to remarry, being a widower. It doesn't only end when a spouse dies. The covenant is broken by adultery and abandonment. A divorce is a public recognition that the marital covenant has ended. </font>[/QUOTE]Since Jesus said anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another is continuously committing adultery, that would not be correct. The only exception Jesus gave was for unfaithfulness during the Jewish betrothal. That exception no longer exists because the custom it pertained to no longer exists. If adultery did "break the covenant" then after any extramarital affair the couple would have to wait until after another wedding intervened before they could be together, since otherwise they'd be committing fornication. And if we go with the heart--thought-life--then that's probably a few weddings a month if not at least a year. That's a lot of weddings.

Johnv
08-29-2003, 07:49 PM
The only exception Jesus gave was for unfaithfulness during the Jewish betrothal.
Jesus DID NOT say that. You're implying it via interpretation, which I can respect, but that's not conclusive enough to be doctrine, only interpretation.

Assuming that you're correct, you're forgetting that a betrothed couple in Jewish tradition were still husband and wife. They could have sex, etc etc, they simply did not have a home together. (betrothal is simply the time between the wedding and moving in together). But when Jesus talks about a bill of divorcements, he doesn't specify that it must be before the couple comes together (during the betrothal period). Jesus never mentions the betrothal perios in regards to divorce.

Taufgesinnter
08-30-2003, 12:22 AM
You're right--explicitly speaking he never mentioned the betrothal or stated that adultery was grounds for divorce.

Lacy Evans
08-30-2003, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
You're right--explicitly speaking he never mentioned the betrothal or stated that adultery was grounds for divorce. huh?

I Am Blessed 24
08-31-2003, 09:11 PM
Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher? No. Not Biblically.

Justified
08-31-2003, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> What you say leads to: a pastor can be a repentant liar, thief, adulterer even, but he cannot be a repentant divorcee. Now you have just invented the "second unpardonable sin!" Let's discuss this remark. Can a divorced man be a pastor in YOUR church or a pastor to YOU?

Diane </font>[/QUOTE]Forgive me, but I didnot read all 7 pages.

Here is my finding in Scripture:

NO! A divoriced man cannot be a Preacher nor a Pastor of a church. No it's not the unpardonable sin, but in reality it is the consquenses of the sin that is this far reaching. He is forgiven of the sin, not the consquenses.

graemlins/sleep.gif

dianetavegia
08-31-2003, 09:33 PM
Justified. I wanted to clarify that the original quote is from someone else and we started a thread to discuss this. If anyone questions how I feel... please see pages one and two of this thread. Those are NOT my words! Just wanted to verify!
Diane

Taufgesinnter
09-01-2003, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
You're right--explicitly speaking he never mentioned the betrothal or stated that adultery was grounds for divorce. huh? </font>[/QUOTE]Jesus didn't say moicheia (adultery) was grounds for divorce. If He had meant that, He could have said it. Doing so would have been unmistakably clear.

Lacy Evans
09-01-2003, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
You're right--explicitly speaking he never mentioned the betrothal or stated that adultery was grounds for divorce. huh? </font>[/QUOTE]Jesus didn't say moicheia (adultery) was grounds for divorce. If He had meant that, He could have said it. Doing so would have been unmistakably clear. </font>[/QUOTE]No, he used the word "fornication" which is a superset of sexual sins including adultery. (Adultry is to fornication as poodle is to dog.) Had he said "adultry", then other forms of fornication would have been excluded. It is a real stretch to say that because he used the general term "Fornication" (Dog) that he meant to exclude the more specific term, "adultry" (poodle). I would say the the exact opposite is true. Christ included all sorts of sexual sins in the exemption. (beastiality is not technically "adultry", nor is child pornography or lesbianism)but they certainly are scriptural reasons for divorce.

I have little use for the "original greek" for exactly this reason. When the "Original English" speaks to us so plainly, why run to "the greek". If you dig around in that junk long enough you can "prove" any position.

Lacy

Sularis
09-03-2003, 01:08 PM
Yes he can!

there is No scripture against it unless
this divorcee gets remarried - then unless his previous spouse is dead - he is disqualified

Divorce is not a sin - it is a sad thing, and it more easily leads to sin - but it is not sin

Justified
09-03-2003, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by Sularis:
Yes he can!

there is No scripture against it unless
this divorcee gets remarried - then unless his previous spouse is dead - he is disqualified

Divorce is not a sin - it is a sad thing, and it more easily leads to sin - but it is not sin Two things:

1-Maybe there is not a Scripture verse that comes out and states that a divoriced man can't be a Preacher and/or Pastor, but Scripture also says that if a man can't rule his own house...

2-Divorice is not a sin? Where does it say that. And particularly in todays divorices!

:cool:

Lacy Evans
09-04-2003, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by Justified:

1-Maybe there is not a Scripture verse that comes out and states that a divoriced man can't be a Preacher and/or Pastor, but Scripture also says that if a man can't rule his own house...

2-Divorice is not a sin? Where does it say that. And particularly in todays divorices!

:cool: [/QB]Perhaps you believe that God cannot "rule his own house", or that God is a sinner!

KJV Jeremiah 3:6-8
6 The Lord said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.
7 And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it.
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

I agree with you that divorce is awful, but in many divorces the innocent party is no more guilty of any sin than God was in Jeremiah 3. I find your comments carelessly presumptuous and mean. I've lived verse 7 brother and I am thankful that God is more sympathetic than many of my Christian brothers.

Lacy Evans

Yellow Bug
09-05-2003, 05:13 PM
I have read some of the posts in this thread but it is a long thread so I haven't read them all. If this question has been answered, I apologize for repeating it.

What if a pastor has committed adultery with a married (but separated from her spouse member) of his congregation? What if he resigned his position and did not pastor a church for 2 years? What if God has forgiven him and another well known pastor asks him to pastor a church again? What if his wife did not leave him? :confused:

Johnv
09-05-2003, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by Justified:
1-Maybe there is not a Scripture verse that comes out and states that a divoriced man can't be a Preacher and/or Pastor, but Scripture also says that if a man can't rule his own house...
That's apples and oranges. If a woman commits adultery and they remain married, that is less of an ability to rule one's house than if the woman commits adultery and the husband divorces her because of her adultulterous action (which is biblically allowed).
Divorice is not a sin? Where does it say that. And particularly in todays divorices!
Divorce is biblically allowable in cases of fornication (adultery) and abandonment. This has already been discussed several times in this thread and others. But no, divorce is not allowable in cases of "we weren't in love anymore", or "we weren't attracted to each other anymore". The simple reason is, we don't get married based on our feelings, so we don't get divorced based on them.

Scott J
09-05-2003, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Yellow Bug:
I have read some of the posts in this thread but it is a long thread so I haven't read them all. If this question has been answered, I apologize for repeating it.

What if a pastor has committed adultery with a married (but separated from her spouse member) of his congregation? What if he resigned his position and did not pastor a church for 2 years? What if God has forgiven him and another well known pastor asks him to pastor a church again? What if his wife did not leave him? :confused: 5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:
6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;
9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

I would say that after only two years he should be closely evaluated concerning the bold portions above. Additionally, as has been discussed, "husband of one wife" can also mean "one woman man" which he obviously failed at.

If I had a say, I would oppose such a man with only two years having passed.

Justified
09-05-2003, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
I agree with you that divorce is awful, but in many divorces the innocent party is no more guilty of any sin than God was in Jeremiah 3. I find your comments carelessly presumptuous and mean. Lacy Evans [/QB]I'm sorry you took it that way, but I make no apologies for God's Principles.

Yes, God forgives the remorseful and repentive sinner, but still holds the consequenses of that sin to the person.

And in this case of divorcement, the consequnses of this is that he cannot be the head of God's Church. He can still participate and help in the local church, he just can't be the leader.

:cool:

Yellow Bug
09-05-2003, 11:28 PM
It has actually been 20 years. He did not disclose the affair to the deacons of the church where he is now. He has, however, been formally accused of inappropiate behavior towards two women he was counseling in the past four years. As well as two informal accusations. One of these women has taken a polygraph and passed it. The pastor refuses to take a polygraph.

One of the deacons was replaced with his brother. The brother divorced his wife and has remarried. I found the record of his divorce.

Lacy Evans
09-06-2003, 03:07 AM
Originally posted by Justified:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
I agree with you that divorce is awful, but in many divorces the innocent party is no more guilty of any sin than God was in Jeremiah 3. I find your comments carelessly presumptuous and mean. Lacy Evans I'm sorry you took it that way, but I make no apologies for God's Principles.

Yes, God forgives the remorseful and repentive sinner, but still holds the consequenses of that sin to the person.

And in this case of divorcement, the consequnses of this is that he cannot be the head of God's Church. He can still participate and help in the local church, he just can't be the leader.

:cool: [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Answer the scripture before you start talking about "God's Principals".


KJV Jeremiah 3:6-8
6 The Lord said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.
7 And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it.
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.


I have no use for man's opinions and theories. Is God guilty of "not ruling his house?" Is God a sinner for divorcing Israel?

There is not one verse in the Bible that holds that a divorced man is (always)in sin and somehow "disqualified" from the ministry and the office of a bishop/pastor.

No one answers the arguments! Why doesn't "having once been" a striker, "having once been" given to wine, "having once been" a novice, "having once been" greedy of filthy lucre disqualify a man from the pastorate? Why do you change the tense of and ignore the context of the whole portion of scripture (I Tim. 3) when you get to that single qualification? It is a streeeeech (at best) to insist on the interpretation that "Husband of one wife" means never "having once been" divorced.

You're sorry I took it that way? How sweet.


Lacy

Taufgesinnter
09-06-2003, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by Justified:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
I agree with you that divorce is awful, but in many divorces the innocent party is no more guilty of any sin than God was in Jeremiah 3. I find your comments carelessly presumptuous and mean. Lacy Evans I'm sorry you took it that way, but I make no apologies for God's Principles.

Yes, God forgives the remorseful and repentive sinner, but still holds the consequenses of that sin to the person.

And in this case of divorcement, the consequnses of this is that he cannot be the head of God's Church. He can still participate and help in the local church, he just can't be the leader.

:cool: [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]We don't know whether Paul was divorced or widowed, only that by the time he wrote his epistles he no longer had a wife. Yet he led.

There is not a single verse of Scripture anywhere that says a divorced man cannot be a church leader. Scripture seems pretty clear a man cannot lead a church if he is living in adultery (remarriage after divorce), but not that he is disqualified simply for being divorced.

greatday
09-10-2003, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by gb93433:
God used Moses to lead His people and he muredered a man. David was used by God and he coveted another man's wife and had her husband killed. Peter cut off a man ear. Paul persecuted believers and I would assume that meant killing them also. Paul was there when Stephen was murdered and it created a martyr complexe for him. As a result Paul wanted to die as a martyr to make amends for murdering Stephen and others and would not accept no as a answer?

Acts 21:10 And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.
21:11 When he had come to us, he took Paul's belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, "Thus says the Holy Spirit, 'So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.' "
21:12 Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem.
21:13 Then Paul answered, "What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus."
21:14 So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, "The will of the Lord be done."

And after David sinned he was not longer greatly used of God but had nothing but trouble and sorrow until his death!

Who says there are no real consequencees for disobying God's word when you should have known better?

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
10:27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.
10:28 Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
10:29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
10:30 For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The LORD will judge His people."
10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

John Wells
09-11-2003, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
KJV Jeremiah 3:6-8
6 The Lord said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.
7 And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it.
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.


I have no use for man's opinions and theories. Is God guilty of "not ruling his house?" Is God a sinner for divorcing Israel?

There is not one verse in the Bible that holds that a divorced man is (always)in sin and somehow "disqualified" from the ministry and the office of a bishop/pastor.

No one answers the arguments! Why doesn't "having once been" a striker, "having once been" given to wine, "having once been" a novice, "having once been" greedy of filthy lucre disqualify a man from the pastorate? Why do you change the tense of and ignore the context of the whole portion of scripture (I Tim. 3) when you get to that single qualification? It is a streeeeech (at best) to insist on the interpretation that "Husband of one wife" means never "having once been" divorced.Bravo! I couldn't agree with you more, Lacy! graemlins/thumbs.gif But you will find many hear who will hold firm to what they want to believe in spite of what the scriptures say!

While there are those here who insist that a pastor's sins (or a particular one) be remembered forever, God says:

For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And I will remember their sins no more." - Heb 8:12 NASB

Thank you God for being more forgiving than some of my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ! graemlins/tear.gif

Taufgesinnter
09-11-2003, 12:24 PM
This is true as long as he isn't remarried (and thus living in continuous and unrepentant adultery).

Johnv
09-11-2003, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
This is true as long as he isn't remarried (and thus living in continuous and unrepentant adultery). A person who has divorced for biblical reasons, and is remarried, is not living in continuous adultery.

Pastor Sam
09-15-2003, 11:38 PM
My church does allow a divorced man or a man married to a divorced woman to be a pastor or a deacon. We feel scripture that says husband of one wife covers this qualification quite well. Because they do only have one wife.

Many believe all sins are forgiven except divorce. Well, we will see in Heaven!!!

I am divorced but woman I was married to ran off with a Deacon and she divorced me.

Paul of Eugene
09-16-2003, 11:30 AM
Pastor Sam, do you or do you not now have a wife?

Answer: you do not, because your wife divorced you.

If you marry now, will you or will you have two wives? you will not, you will have one.

You will HAVE HAD two in your life, but you will only HAVE one.

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

Consider the words of Jesus to the Samaritan Woman, when she said, "I have no husband." He never said "you have five husbands". He said "You answered rightly."

Pastor Sam
09-16-2003, 05:53 PM
Yes I am married. I have one wife and so I am the husband of one wife. The woman I was married to years ago is not my wife.

Taufgesinnter
09-16-2003, 10:55 PM
Then she has died.

Lacy Evans
09-16-2003, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
Pastor Sam, do you or do you not now have a wife?

Answer: you do not, because your wife divorced you.

If you marry now, will you or will you have two wives? you will not, you will have one.

You will HAVE HAD two in your life, but you will only HAVE one.

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

Consider the words of Jesus to the Samaritan Woman, when she said, "I have no husband." He never said "you have five husbands". He said "You answered rightly." Amen Brother Paul of eugene graemlins/thumbs.gif If all else fails read the Bible!

Lacy

Taufgesinnter
09-17-2003, 04:49 AM
Yup, and it's irrefutably clear: whoever is divorced from his wife and marries another is continually committing adultery.

Pastor Sam
09-17-2003, 09:20 AM
Get a life...you guys can even read the English version of the Bible. Maybe you need to find a new profession.

Lacy Evans
09-17-2003, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Pastor Sam:
Get a life...you guys can even read the English version of the Bible. Maybe you need to find a new profession. Er... It seems to me that all of us but Taufgesinnter are agreeing with you and even he only disagrees about the remarriage part. Breath deep. It's OK. Even if we did disagree (Which we don't), we still love you.

Lacy

Johnv
09-17-2003, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Yup, and it's irrefutably clear: whoever is divorced from his wife and marries another is continually committing adultery. It's also irrefutably clear that a man who is divorced from his wife due to her adultery or abandonment is not committing adultery if he remarries.

Johnv
09-17-2003, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by Pastor Sam:
I am divorced but woman I was married to ran off with a Deacon and she divorced me. Interesting:

She committed adultery. You did not sin.
She divorced you. Assuming that divorce is a sin, and she divorced you, then still, you did not sin.

Jesus says that a man who remarries, EXCEPT FOR ADULTERY, commits adultery. Hence, if you marry, you would not be committing adultery, and you'd be the husband of one wife.

Taufgesinnter
09-17-2003, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Yup, and it's irrefutably clear: whoever is divorced from his wife and marries another is continually committing adultery. It's also irrefutably clear that a man who is divorced from his wife due to her adultery or abandonment is not committing adultery if he remarries. </font>[/QUOTE]That is openly erroroneous, since Jesus never said that. He said "fornication" (porneia). If He'd meant "adultery" (moicheia), He'd have said so. That would have been unequivocal and unmistakable--but He didn't.

Johnv
09-17-2003, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
He said "fornication" (porneia). If He'd meant "adultery" (moicheia), He'd have said so. That would have been unequivocal and unmistakable--but He didn't. Okay, fair enough. Fornication is sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. A spouse who commits adultery is guilty of fornication.

Gunther
09-17-2003, 04:57 PM
My question is this:

if a man is divorced (assuming the blameless mandate doesn't matter), is he still qualified to speak on marriage?

If he isn't qualified to do so, he isn't going to fulfill the ordained role of preaching the whole counsel of God.

Further, he wouldn't be setting an example to the flock, as is also his God ordained role.

If someone could biblically answer the above, that would be helpful. Thanks.

Johnv
09-17-2003, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
My question is this:

if a man is divorced (assuming the blameless mandate doesn't matter), is he still qualified to speak on marriage?
I wouldn't see why not, in the same manner that a man who has never experiences the loss of a loved one could still be qualified to speak on grief. Or in the same manner that a person who has never abused alcohol or drugs is still qualified to speak on the damaging effects of alcohol and drug abuse.

Gunther
09-17-2003, 06:52 PM
John, I asked biblically and included further reasons. Could you elaborate on the other as well, and still be consistent?

Johnv
09-17-2003, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
John, I asked biblically and included further reasons. Could you elaborate on the other as well, and still be consistent? Bear with me here a bit:

Let's take a look at the Greek. The one who desires the office must be "blameless" and “the husband of one wife” (Greek – mias gunaikas andras) Compare this to 1 Timothy 5:19 which reads henos andros gune. The context here is within the present infinitive verb, and necessitates the translation as in the present tense. Presently, he must be the husband of one wife. If the man was divorced, lawfully (according to the NT context), then this should be taken into consideration. If the man was not divorced lawfully then remarried, biblically he and his newly wed wife are committing adultery and should not be considered for office.

I can find no biblical differentiation in regards to the abolity to speak with authority on a subject, based on one's matiral status.

John Wells
09-17-2003, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
My question is this:

if a man is divorced (assuming the blameless mandate doesn't matter), is he still qualified to speak on marriage?

If he isn't qualified to do so, he isn't going to fulfill the ordained role of preaching the whole counsel of God.

Further, he wouldn't be setting an example to the flock, as is also his God ordained role.

If someone could biblically answer the above, that would be helpful. Thanks. Gunther,

Let me use your words, with a minor adjustment and throw your question right back at you:

if a man has sinned (assuming the blameless mandate doesn't matter), is he still qualified to speak on sin?

If he isn't qualified to do so, he isn't going to fulfill the ordained role of preaching the whole counsel of God.

Further, he wouldn't be setting an example to the flock, as is also his God ordained role.

Who then can preach? :eek:

Gunther
09-17-2003, 10:54 PM
The issue is whether or not divorce disqualifies a person. Stick with the group here.

Taufgesinnter
09-18-2003, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
He said "fornication" (porneia). If He'd meant "adultery" (moicheia), He'd have said so. That would have been unequivocal and unmistakable--but He didn't. Okay, fair enough. Fornication is sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. A spouse who commits adultery is guilty of fornication. </font>[/QUOTE]I wouldn't exactly consider pre-marital sex (fornication) adultery.

Paul of Eugene
09-18-2003, 10:39 AM
I have a problem with some of what you posted.

Originally posted by Johnv:
If the man was not divorced lawfully then remarried, biblically he and his newly wed wife are committing adultery and should not be considered for office.
This is a problamatic statement because - you are stating this case is an ongoing, continual sin. If that were true they could stop sinning somehow. But how? They cannot divorce - divorce is a sin. They can only repent of having married and stay married.

Therefore you should say they sinned (past tense) not that they are living in sin (present tense).

Johnv
09-18-2003, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
I wouldn't exactly consider pre-marital sex (fornication) adultery. Context, context, context!!!!

A MARRIED person who engages in fornication (sex with an unmarried person) is committing adultery. There's no way that a maarried person cannot fornicate without committing adultery.

Johnv
09-18-2003, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
This is a problamatic statement because - you are stating this case is an ongoing, continual sin. If that were true they could stop sinning somehow. But how? They cannot divorce - divorce is a sin. They can only repent of having married and stay married.

Therefore you should say they sinned (past tense) not that they are living in sin (present tense). I personally would accept that. While I wouldn't recommend that anyone put themselves in that position, if someone came from a marriage which they ended without a biblical reason, and they remarry without acknowleging the sin of their divorce, then they need to acknowlege that. However, most folks I know who ended their marriages for such a reason acknowleged that long before remarrying (it's often part of the healing process). But I could see why, in this case, they might be disqualified from a church office.

However, that still does not change the adultery issue. If someone has divorced because of adultery, their divorce is not a sin. It is the sin of the adulterer, not the one who was cheated on. Such a person would not be disqualified for this reason.

showard93
09-19-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor Sam:
Get a life...you guys can even read the English version of the Bible. Maybe you need to find a new profession. Er... It seems to me that all of us but Taufgesinnter are agreeing with you and even he only disagrees about the remarriage part. Breath deep. It's OK. Even if we did disagree (Which we don't), we still love you.

Lacy </font>[/QUOTE]I agree with taufgesinnter... I think the bible is very clear on divorce and remarriage I just think it is so big in our day that society sees it as okay and they think it is fine to not take your vows seriously even preachers.

The wedding vows we take say's until death do us part and I think that is for a reason.

Even if the man or preacher is not the reason for the divorce it still gives no right to remarry except by death even if it is for adultrey. If you did get a divorce for adultrey then you have biblical grounds for a divorce but not to remarry. It may not seem right but that is Bible.

Johnv
09-19-2003, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
I agree with taufgesinnter... I think the bible is very clear on divorce and remarriage
The Bible is clear: Divorce is permissible in cases of adultery and abandonment. On remarriage, the Bible says only that a man who remarries is committing adultery, but it also says that there are exceptions (such as adultery).

The wedding vows we take say's until death do us part and I think that is for a reason.
A vow is a covenant between people. Covenants involve multiple parties. When the covenant is broken, the covenant ceases to exist.
Even if the man or preacher is not the reason for the divorce it still gives no right to remarry except by death even if it is for adultrey.
The Bible does not say that.
If you did get a divorce for adultrey then you have biblical grounds for a divorce but not to remarry. It may not seem right but that is Bible. That is NOT the Bible. The Bible does not say that a divorced victim of adultery or abandonment cannot marry. Additionally, the Bible says it is not good for man to be alone, and that it is better for a man to marry than to burn with lust in his heart than to remain single. I'm divorced. My spouse was caught in adultery, and chose to leave me to be with the other man. I've been divorced for several years. I did not sin. There is currently no marital covenant for me to keep. I've healed. I'm dating. I plan on marrying again, since I, as a male, have the desire share my life, physically, emotionally, spiritually, and sexually, with another. The Bible says it is not good for me to be alone, and that it is better for me to marry.

showard93
09-19-2003, 06:27 PM
I am glad that you have healed however I still stand on the fact that there is no reason to remarry except death. I am also saying that I don't know if I could stay single especially if I was the innocent one in the marriage as you was. This debate started as can a divorced man be a pastor and I say only if he never remarries or if his spouse dies.

Taufgesinnter
09-19-2003, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
I wouldn't exactly consider pre-marital sex (fornication) adultery. Context, context, context!!!!

A MARRIED person who engages in fornication (sex with an unmarried person) is committing adultery. There's no way that a maarried person cannot fornicate without committing adultery. </font>[/QUOTE]The context was the Hebrew betrothal.

And the Bible nowhere says that anyone divorced for adultery can remarry. Nowhere at all.

Johnv
09-19-2003, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by showard93:
I am glad that you have healed however I still stand on the fact that there is no reason to remarry except death.
(1 Corinthians 7:8,9) I say to the unmarried and to widowed that it is good for them if they remain single, as am I. But if they cannot contain themselves, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
I desire a sexual relationship with someone. Hence, Paul says I should seek to enter into a marriage.

I am also saying that I don't know if I could stay single especially if I was the innocent one in the marriage as you was.
That's when we should simply live to the best of our imperfect ability, get married if we must, and turn it over to God. Which is probably a good way to handle most sticky situations in life smile.gif
This debate started as can a divorced man be a pastor and I say only if he never remarries or if his spouse dies. There's no difinitive biblical exclusion on the topic that extends more to mastors than men in general.

Johnv
09-19-2003, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The context was the Hebrew betrothal.The context IS NOT Hebrew betrothal. However, assuming it is, the Hebrew betrothal period takes place after marriage. It is not equivalent to the western engagement, which is prior to marriage.
And the Bible nowhere says that anyone divorced for adultery can remarry. Nowhere at all. The Bible DOES NOT exclude divorced individuals from remarrying. It only says that those who have divorced for unbiblical reasons and remarry are committing adultery.

Lacy Evans
09-19-2003, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The context was the Hebrew betrothal.
I can't find the word betrothal(Or the concept)in Matthew 5. Can you prove this, in English?

Lacy

[ September 19, 2003, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: Lacy Evans ]

Taufgesinnter
09-20-2003, 04:09 AM
http://webbministries.tripod.com/contents.htm

See chapter 6 especially, starting about halfway through.

Paul of Eugene
09-20-2003, 04:36 PM
To me, the bottom line is, Biblically, a man should be married to only one wife at the time of calling as a pastor. All bigamists need not apply. Divorce history is irrelevant, as is any other criminal or moral history, except as it sheds light on his current moral qualifications.

Because the scriptural injunctions are present tense, not past tense.

What's even more shocking, is, I am perfectly willing to accept a man that is unmarried as a pastor, even though the scriptures do not explicitely state that is ok. I merely assume that the scripture is warning against accepting bigamists as pastors and deacons. There have always been bigamists, and at the time the bible was written, it was perfectly legal.

Pastor Sam
09-20-2003, 07:39 PM
Johnv

I agree with you and most of the people on here just can't read well. They have been taught a certain way and that is it nothing can change it. I was taught the same when i was young but I always questioned it.

The woman I was formerly married to ran off with another man and divorced me. I didn't want the divorce and I tried to get her to reconcile but she refused.

Now I am maried to a wonderful woman that truly knows the meaning of commitment.

Taufgesinnter
09-21-2003, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
To me, the bottom line is, Biblically, a man should be married to only one wife at the time of calling as a pastor. All bigamists need not apply. Divorce history is irrelevant, as is any other criminal or moral history, except as it sheds light on his current moral qualifications.

Because the scriptural injunctions are present tense, not past tense.

What's even more shocking, is, I am perfectly willing to accept a man that is unmarried as a pastor, even though the scriptures do not explicitely state that is ok. I merely assume that the scripture is warning against accepting bigamists as pastors and deacons. There have always been bigamists, and at the time the bible was written, it was perfectly legal. The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant.

Johnv
09-22-2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Pastor Sam:
Johnv

I agree with you and most of the people on here just can't read well. They have been taught a certain way and that is it nothing can change it. I was taught the same when i was young but I always questioned it.

The woman I was formerly married to ran off with another man and divorced me. I didn't want the divorce and I tried to get her to reconcile but she refused.

Now I am maried to a wonderful woman that truly knows the meaning of commitment. And I have no doubt that God is blessing your marriage, and the Jesus Christ is the head of your household. Let others say what they will, but ultimately, it is between you, your spouse, and your Lord.

Johnv
09-22-2003, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant. Nope, the Bible is very specific: adultery and abandonment break the marital covenant. Where there is not marital covenant, there is not marriage. A person whose marriage has ended because of these is not considered married according the God's Word.

However, when divorcing for reasons outside of the Biblical reasons, then I would agree with you. For example, if I left my wife because she didn't make enough money, and married a rich woman, I'd be living in adultery. However, my ex wife, were she to remarry, would not be living in adultery, because she was biblically abandoned.

Taufgesinnter
09-22-2003, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant. Nope, the Bible is very specific: adultery and abandonment break the marital covenant. Where there is not marital covenant, there is not marriage. A person whose marriage has ended because of these is not considered married according the God's Word.</font>[/QUOTE]Why do you keep saying that when it's openly untrue? The NT nowhere says--anywhere, ever--in even a single verse, that moicheia breaks the lifetime spiritual bond of marriage. The NT never says that abandonment is grounds for remarriage. It just isn't there.

I wonder how many times somebody can lose their salvation. I'm only wondering because you said when one party in a covenant breaks it, the covenant is ended--the other party's word is no longer good either, because somehow they're released from their promises, even if their vows are for life (and thus irrevocable). I don't seem to recall anywhere that I've heard a marriage vow that said "as long as we both shall keep them" or "until you break your vows."

Johnv
09-22-2003, 04:48 PM
What is the biblical purpose of divorce if not to end the marital covenant? It makes no biblical sense to divorce someone if the covenant still exists.

Obviously, death breaks the covenant (which the bible doesn't explicitly say, but it is implied). So the arguement that the covenant is eternal (as it is in OSAS salvation) does not relate to this topic.

Gunther
09-22-2003, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
What is the biblical purpose of divorce if not to end the marital covenant? It makes no biblical sense to divorce someone if the covenant still exists.Actually, it does say that in Romans 7:4-6 and 1 Cor. 7:39.

Johnv
09-22-2003, 05:26 PM
Romans 7:4-6 don't discuss the marital covenant. 1 Cor. 7:39 supports my previous point, which is that the marital covenant is finite, not infinite, like the salvation covenant.

Gunther
09-22-2003, 05:29 PM
Sorry, Romans 7:2-3.

Johnv
09-22-2003, 05:34 PM
Oh, that's better. It doesn't discuss divorce and remarriage. It discusses polygamy. It says that someone who marries another while their spouse is alive is committing adultery.

Contrast that to Jesus' words, that says anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another, EXCEPT IN CASES OF ADULTERY, forces a commission of adultery.

Gunther
09-22-2003, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
1. It doesn't discuss divorce and remarriage.

2. It discusses polygamy.

3. It says that someone who marries another while their spouse is alive is committing adultery.

4. Contrast that to Jesus' words, that says anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another, EXCEPT IN CASES OF ADULTERY, forces a commission of adultery. 1. It discusses remarriage.

2. No where does it even hint at polygamy.

3. Exactly. It also says that the marriage law is in full effect until death. Amazing how Paul only sees death as the end of the covenant.

4. Can you quote me that passage. Jesus never says that in the case of adultery is it okay to divorce or remarry.

Johnv
09-22-2003, 06:19 PM
Matthew 5:32 ... anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

Gunther
09-22-2003, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
Matthew 5:32 ... anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. I noticed you used the NIV. Unfortunately, the NIV completely misses this one and is another example of how the NIV performs interpretation rather than translation.

The word "pornea" means sexual immorality. So, the NIV restricts the meaning to marriage. If Jesus meant that, he would have used the word for adultery. Unfortunately for your position John, he didn't.

Seeing how the context is an interpretation of the O.T. law, there is only one passage he could have been referring to and only one that everyone would have known: Leviticus 18-19 (which addresses the laws on sexual morality).

Johnv
09-22-2003, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by Gunther:
I noticed you used the NIV. Unfortunately, the NIV completely misses this one and is another example of how the NIV performs interpretation rather than translation.

NASB - everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery

NLT - a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery

NKJV - whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery

ASV - every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress

Please tell me how the message is different.
The word "pornea" means sexual immorality. So, the NIV restricts the meaning to marriage. If Jesus meant that, he would have used the word for adultery. Unfortunately for your position John, he didn't.
That makes no sense whatsoever. A married person who fornicates is by definition committing adultery. I do not see how using the word "fornication" as opposed to "adultery" changes the fact that Jesus is stating an exception for marital unfaithfulness in cases of divorce.
Seeing how the context is an interpretation of the O.T. law, there is only one passage he could have been referring to and only one that everyone would have known: Leviticus 18-19 (which addresses the laws on sexual morality). Jesus is referring to the OT law that said anyone who wants to divorce must give his spouse a certificate of divorce. Jesus is saying that anyone who wants to divorce cannot morally do so except where there is marital unfaithfulness.

Gunther
09-22-2003, 09:17 PM
John, where in the O.T. does it talk about the laws regarding sexual morality? Note that Christ kept giving the correct interpretation of the Law.

The message is different in the NIV because it limits the activity to marriage. "Marital" and "unfaithfulness" do not come from "pornea". That is an interpretation John.

showard93
09-22-2003, 11:20 PM
I will still say like Gunther and others have said that yes the Bible does say you can divorce because of Adultrey but it gives no reason to remarry except by death. I will also say that people can make the Bible say what they want it to say but Jesus meant One man and one woman for one lifetime.

Taufgesinnter
09-22-2003, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by Johnv:
Oh, that's better. It doesn't discuss divorce and remarriage. It discusses polygamy. It says that someone who marries another while their spouse is alive is committing adultery.

Contrast that to Jesus' words, that says anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another, EXCEPT IN CASES OF ADULTERY, forces a commission of adultery. Are you just inventing this out of your imagination? Or have you found a lost gospel of Bartholomew or something? Jesus' own words were that anyone who divorces and marries another is continuously committing adultery--but His exception NEVER said moicheia. Jesus NEVER SAID "except in cases of adultery"--that is NOT found in the Word of God.

gb93433
09-23-2003, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by showard93:
I will still say like Gunther and others have said that yes the Bible does say you can divorce because of Adultrey but it gives no reason to remarry except by death. I will also say that people can make the Bible say what they want it to say but Jesus meant One man and one woman for one lifetime. The reason Moses commanded to give a bill of divorcement was because the men could prevent a woman from remarrying even though her husband had left. The certificate of divorced proved that she was free from her former husband and it allowed her to remarry.

Baptist in Richmond
09-26-2003, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Are you just inventing this out of your imagination? Or have you found a lost gospel of Bartholomew or something? Jesus' own words were that anyone who divorces and marries another is continuously committing adultery--but His exception NEVER said moicheia. Jesus NEVER SAID "except in cases of adultery"--that is NOT found in the Word of God. Once again, where is the specific Scripture that supports your statement that "anyone who divorces and marries another is continuously committing adultery." [emphasis mine]

Isn't it bizarre that the seven translations I have disagree with you?

Don
09-27-2003, 03:10 AM
The topic is: Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher?

A preacher? We had better ALL of us be preachers, men and women alike (and the subject of a woman holding a position of authority over men doesn't enter into this; preaching the Word is something every Christian should do, period. As for women being pastors, well, now, that's a woman holding a position of authority, and a subject for another thread--although I believe it's already been done at least once).

Can a divorced man pastor? Sure he can, and a lot of them do.

Should he? No.

Taufgesinnter
09-27-2003, 06:42 AM
Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Are you just inventing this out of your imagination? Or have you found a lost gospel of Bartholomew or something? Jesus' own words were that anyone who divorces and marries another is continuously committing adultery--but His exception NEVER said moicheia. Jesus NEVER SAID "except in cases of adultery"--that is NOT found in the Word of God. Once again, where is the specific Scripture that supports your statement that "anyone who divorces and marries another is continuously committing adultery." [emphasis mine]

Isn't it bizarre that the seven translations I have disagree with you? </font>[/QUOTE]Luke 16:18 says: "PaV (o apoluwn thn gunaika autou kai gamvn (eteran moiceuei, kai paV (o apolelumenhn apo andros gamvn moiceuei."

The words apoluwn and gamvn are present participles, and apolelumenhn is a perfect participle; technically, participles do not declare absolute time because they are not in the indicative mood, but they are typically tagged with relative time according to context. In this verse they are respectively best translated dismisses or puts away, marries, and her who has been dismissed or her who has been put away.

However, moiceuei is a present-tense verb, and the only verb that appears in the verse. While the aorist expresses punctiliar action without regard to time, the Greek present is primarily durative or progressive. Both the Greek present and imperfect have the continuous aspect. Unless you would have the verb translated iteratively, you must accept that the present in Greek indicates action in progress, a linear Aktionsart. It's the same case with moiceuei (moiceia) in Luke 16:18 as it is with (amartanwn ((amartanw) in 1 John 3:6.

Baptist in Richmond
09-27-2003, 10:14 AM
So, are you saying that everyone, starting with Wiclif, got it wrong??

Both the Greek present and imperfect have the continuous aspect. Unless you would have the verb translated iteratively, you must accept that the present in Greek indicates action in progress, a linear Aktionsart. So, how does the "action in progress" imply perpetuity?

[ September 27, 2003, 10:21 AM: Message edited by: Baptist in Richmond ]

Taufgesinnter
09-29-2003, 02:17 AM
2. The action is always in progress, which is why it's called the continuous aspect.

1. Do you know how tedious it'd have been to put "keep on," "continues to," "is continually," etc., etc., in with every verb having continuous aspect? It's like the wordy, "It has been written and stands written," which accurately conveys the Greek perfect--it's not very fluid in English. We just let it lose something in translation by rendering it "It is written."

Don
09-29-2003, 09:52 AM
Baptist in Richmond, how would it NOT be continuously committing adultery?

If I'm unmarried and move in with a woman--with the purpose of living together as if we were married--then I'm living in sin. It's not something I do once at the beginning of the situation and then am no longer guilty of.

Same with Jesus' statement in Matthew 19:9. He who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; not just once at the beginning, but the entire time he's married to the second wife.

However, I would caution: Don't get another divorce to try to fix the first one.

Baptist in Richmond
09-29-2003, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Don:
However, I would caution: Don't get another divorce to try to fix the first one. Don: you cannot have it both ways.
If you believe that a person is re-married, but is not to get divorced, then the laws of marriage apply to the new marriage. The Apostle Paul was very specific about the conduct of husbands and wives. If there are a specific set of rules for the second marriage, then where are they to be found?

Baptist in Richmond
09-29-2003, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
2. The action is always in progress, which is why it's called the continuous aspect. "In progress" does not equal "continuous." There is a vast difference.

1. Do you know how tedious it'd have been to put "keep on," "continues to," "is continually," etc., etc., in with every verb having continuous aspect? It's like the wordy, "It has been written and stands written," which accurately conveys the Greek perfect--it's not very fluid in English. We just let it lose something in translation by rendering it "It is written." I strongly disagree with you. You are opening the door to a complete re-interpretation of God's Holy Word. If your postulate is accurate, every single same-tense verb would fall in this category. Moreover, if this was to be interpreted in this manner, then why is this so arguably ambiguous while the Apostle Paul was very specific?

Taufgesinnter
09-30-2003, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
2. The action is always in progress, which is why it's called the continuous aspect. "In progress" does not equal "continuous." There is a vast difference.

1. Do you know how tedious it'd have been to put "keep on," "continues to," "is continually," etc., etc., in with every verb having continuous aspect? It's like the wordy, "It has been written and stands written," which accurately conveys the Greek perfect--it's not very fluid in English. We just let it lose something in translation by rendering it "It is written." I strongly disagree with you. You are opening the door to a complete re-interpretation of God's Holy Word. If your postulate is accurate, every single same-tense verb would fall in this category. Moreover, if this was to be interpreted in this manner, then why is this so arguably ambiguous while the Apostle Paul was very specific? </font>[/QUOTE]Regarding your first paragraph, please explain what the difference is between something always occurring in every moment beginning at a certain point in time and something that is occurring continuously from a certain point in time.

As to your second paragraph, this is elementary Greek grammar. It's not my postulate. Funk, ed., transl., A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Blass and DeBrunner (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), sec. 318. Edward W. Goodrick, Do It Yourself Hebrew and Greek (Multnomah Press, 1976), 4:13. Punctiliar or momentary action is carried by the aorist, completed past action with effects continuing into the present by the perfect, action in progress in the past by the imperfect, and durative (linear or progressive) action in the present, or iterative action, both by the present tense.

Don
09-30-2003, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Don:
However, I would caution: Don't get another divorce to try to fix the first one. Don: you cannot have it both ways.
If you believe that a person is re-married, but is not to get divorced, then the laws of marriage apply to the new marriage. The Apostle Paul was very specific about the conduct of husbands and wives. If there are a specific set of rules for the second marriage, then where are they to be found? </font>[/QUOTE]BIR, in the military, we call what you're doing "quibbling".

The principle for not getting a SECOND divorce, in order to try to rectify the first divorce, is very simple: Two wrongs do not make a right. If a first divorce was bad enough, how can a second divorce be "better"? It can be as bad as, or worse; but it can't be better.

Admit you've done wrong, ask forgiveness, receive the forgiveness, and then continue on (not YOU in particular; just the generic pronoun applying to all of us).

Emory
09-30-2003, 04:11 PM
Hello,

1 Cor. 7:12-16 Paul gives instructions for believers who are married to unbelievers. He says in 12 and 13, "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him."

The verse that I would like to point out is verse 15:

"But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace."

What "bondage" is Paul refering to? Marriage? That seems to be the context here. Are believer/unbeliever marriages binding? Paul says no, doesn't he? What does this mean for a unbeliever/unbeliever marriage?

God Bless,

Emory

Taufgesinnter
09-30-2003, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by Don:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Don:
However, I would caution: Don't get another divorce to try to fix the first one. Don: you cannot have it both ways.
If you believe that a person is re-married, but is not to get divorced, then the laws of marriage apply to the new marriage. The Apostle Paul was very specific about the conduct of husbands and wives. If there are a specific set of rules for the second marriage, then where are they to be found? </font>[/QUOTE]BIR, in the military, we call what you're doing "quibbling".

The principle for not getting a SECOND divorce, in order to try to rectify the first divorce, is very simple: Two wrongs do not make a right. If a first divorce was bad enough, how can a second divorce be "better"? It can be as bad as, or worse; but it can't be better.

Admit you've done wrong, ask forgiveness, receive the forgiveness, and then continue on (not YOU in particular; just the generic pronoun applying to all of us). </font>[/QUOTE]You're saying confess you've sinned, ask forgiveness, receive forgiveness, and then continue in unrepentant sin. The laws of marriage do not apply to living in adultery. Divorce from the "second" marriage would be only to satisfy human law, since under it the unmarried party is free to be married to someone truly eligible to be married to them under God's law, and opens the way for "re"-marriage of the married party to their true spouse. Divorce under human law to someone God doesn't consider someone married to is not a wrong. The second divorce is only artificial because it's terminating adultery. Second divorce or not, separation is mandatory immediately upon repentance of the adultery, by definition. And the married adulterer must be open to reconciliation with the real spouse.

Baptist in Richmond
09-30-2003, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by Don:
BIR, in the military, we call what you're doing "quibbling".:confused:
Okay, Don: let’s look at what you said:

Same with Jesus' statement in Matthew 19:9. He who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; not just once at the beginning, but the entire time he's married to the second wife.Where is the implied perpetuity here, Don? Are you saying that divorce is an unforgivable sin?

The principle for not getting a SECOND divorce, in order to try to rectify the first divorce, is very simple: Two wrongs do not make a right. If a first divorce was bad enough, how can a second divorce be "better"? It can be as bad as, or worse; but it can't be better.

Admit you've done wrong, ask forgiveness, receive the forgiveness, and then continue on (not YOU in particular; just the generic pronoun applying to all of us). Once again, you cannot have it both ways.
If you are saying that divorce is a sin that can be forgiven, then you and I are in agreement. If you are saying that a remarried person is to remain celibate, then we disagree. This is not stated anywhere in the Bible. If a divorced person asks for forgiveness, then the sin is forgiven. If the divorced person is to remain married (as you stated), then the laws of marriage absolutely apply to the second marriage. If you do not agree that the laws of marriage don't apply to the new marriage, then provide the Scripture that outlines the behavior for remarriage.

Baptist in Richmond
09-30-2003, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
As to your second paragraph, this is elementary Greek grammar. It's not my postulate. Funk, ed., transl., A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Blass and DeBrunner (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), sec. 318. Edward W. Goodrick, Do It Yourself Hebrew and Greek (Multnomah Press, 1976), 4:13. Punctiliar or momentary action is carried by the aorist, completed past action with effects continuing into the present by the perfect, action in progress in the past by the imperfect, and durative (linear or progressive) action in the present, or iterative action, both by the present tense. So, you are saying that the present-tense verb in Classical Greek refers to “durative (linear or progressive) action in the present, or iterative action,” but not to a simple present-tense verb? I am not a Classical Greek scholar (nor have I presented myself as such), but I really find it incredibly hard to believe that the Ancient Greeks, with all their accomplishments, could not grasp the concept of present-tense verbs.

Moreover, if this is indeed "elementary Greek grammar," then how did this evade every translator? Why is it not presented in such a manner to state that the sin is continuous? Let's examine an earlier statement made in this thread:

Do you know how tedious it'd have been to put "keep on," "continues to," "is continually," etc., etc., in with every verb having continuous aspect? It's like the wordy, "It has been written and stands written," which accurately conveys the Greek perfect--it's not very fluid in English. We just let it lose something in translation by rendering it "It is written." You have referred to the "Greek perfect," and the thrift utilized in English does not change the meaning of "It is written." In contrast, if your argument concerning the Greek present is true, then the translators [i]completely changed the concept that Jesus was laying before the Pharisees. en masse!] Starting with Wiclif, every translation of God's Word that I possess is essentially the same. This is opening Pandora's box with respect to the interpretation of the Scriptures.

Let's take that thought further. If adultery is a "continuous" sin as you contend, then why wasn't the rule of celibacy you claim specifically stated in Scripture? Even if your theory of "continuous adultery" is true, why didn't Jesus state that re-married people are to remain celibate?

Taufgesinnter
09-30-2003, 07:34 PM
It's not "my" argument, it's basic Koine Greek.

Jesus was pretty specific when He said remarriage is adultery. And the fact of Greek tenses aside, the adultery would only last as long as a remarriage.

Baptist in Richmond
09-30-2003, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
It's not "my" argument, it's basic Koine Greek.So, do you believe that every single translator got it wrong?

Jesus was pretty specific when He said remarriage is adultery. And the fact of Greek tenses aside, the adultery would only last as long as a remarriage. The "fact of Greek tenses aside?" You didn't address my question as to whether or not the present verb in Ancient Greek refers to present tense. Am I to believe that this is true?

You didn't answer my question, so let me try again: If adultery is a "continuous" sin as you contend, then why wasn't the rule of celibacy you claim specifically stated in Scripture?

Paul of Eugene
10-01-2003, 11:23 AM
Once upon a time David married Bathsheba. This marriage was contrary to the will of God and was a sin to have entered into.

But the marriage, once in place, was always counted as a legitimate marriage after that, and in fact the offspring from that marriage became the next king of Israel.

A marriage, even if wrongly entered into, is still a marriage. A divorce, even from a marriage wrongly entered into, is still hated by God.

However, a divorce does, in fact, end a marriage so that is is no longer a marriage. This is shown by the answer Jesus gave the woman at the well, for she said "I have no husband" and Jesus told her she was telling the truth. And this was the truth although she had been married five times and he whom she now had was not her husband.

Given all this, any past history of marriage and divorce clearly should not count against a present candidate for the ministry, providing his life indicates he has repented of previous sins of divorce and remarriage (and all the other sins in his life also, of course) and his current marital status qualifies, that is, he doesn't have more than one wife.

On the other hand, I have a fear that we do very little in the way of actually examining a candidate in terms of the moral standards; Jesus had a lot to say against the pharasees that did not at all involve divorce, but do we ever judge a man on those things Jesus complained about in them?

newlady3203
10-01-2003, 02:13 PM
A male divorcee definitely cannot be a pastor. As stated previously, he must be the husband of one wife, not one at a time. The same holds for women. Women cannot be pastors because you canot be a woman and be the husband of one wife. But, that is whole other discussion.

The Bible says no, and we are supposed to follow His Word.

Emory
10-01-2003, 10:17 PM
So a man who has been divorced within biblical lines and remarries has two wives?

Jesus said certain divorce did not cause adultery upon remarriage. How then can anyone claim that a man who divorces for these reasons and remarries has (as I have heard some preachers say) "two living wives?"

Emory
10-01-2003, 10:30 PM
One other thought. I see that the post question is "Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/Preacher?"

Are the two the same (pastor/preacher)?

If the divorcee is "disqualified" from the pastorate, what stops him from preaching on occasion, say, once every few months for a morning servive, Youth Sunday, or at a nursing home ministry, etc?

C.S. Murphy
10-02-2003, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
Once upon a time David married Bathsheba. This marriage was contrary to the will of God and was a sin to have entered into.

But the marriage, once in place, was always counted as a legitimate marriage after that, and in fact the offspring from that marriage became the next king of Israel.

***Murph-- But David was in the O.T. and men had several wives, the N.T. states husband of one.

However, a divorce does, in fact, end a marriage so that is is no longer a marriage. This is shown by the answer Jesus gave the woman at the well, for she said "I have no husband" and Jesus told her she was telling the truth. And this was the truth although she had been married five times and he whom she now had was not her husband.

****Murph---I will admit this is a good point and one that I have not thought of before but I can't say definately because Paul's writings seem to dissagree.

Given all this, any past history of marriage and divorce clearly should not count against a present candidate for the ministry, providing his life indicates he has repented of previous sins of divorce and remarriage (and all the other sins in his life also, of course) and his current marital status qualifies, that is, he doesn't have more than one wife.

***Murph--- Now no offense but I feel you have to go upon extra biblical evidence or just a gut feeling to make the statement above, I would love to speak to paul and ask him for certain what he meant by one wife but for now I must go with the scripture.

On the other hand, I have a fear that we do very little in the way of actually examining a candidate in terms of the moral standards; Jesus had a lot to say against the pharasees that did not at all involve divorce, but do we ever judge a man on those things Jesus complained about in them?


***Murph---- Amen and amen