Divorced Pastors...or Pastor's married to divorcees.

Amen. I believe the rest of us can say the same. I might add, "nor did I change it to match the unfounded traditions of certain churches, nor did I add to it."

 

I do not think divorce disqualifies a man forever as long as he did not seek the divorce. Remarriage to a different woman does disqualify him from being a Pastor, Elder or Deacon at least, that what the Word of God says.

This may come as a bit of a shock but you are right and you missed the point.
The woman HAD (past tense) 5 husbands therefore she could not be the wife of only one husband yet she was the wife of one husband at a time.
If that is what Paul meant why did he not say "at a time" then it would be obvious that he meant polygamy only. Paul wrote what he did because he was inspired by God and he also meant divorced and remarried to another. Oh yeah, by the way, I don't think the woman was applying to be a pastor.

Ann is right, the scripture is very enlightening when read for what it says.

 

Ya don't say.

 

Where does the Bible say that?

That is not what Christ said, nor what she said. She had had, in the past, five husbands. The one she was with at the time, she had not been married to. Jesus said that she had NO husband...not one that she was committing adultery against, nor five. NONE.

Because what he said already addresses only polygamy. He did not need to at "at a time." Had he wanted to address the issue of divorce, he would have done so. He did not.

The verse neither says, nor implies, divorce. If I tell you it is illegal to have more than one wife, I am referring, by definition, to polygamy, not divorce. To refer to divorce, I would need to say "It is illegal for you to get divorced."

If he meant divorce, he would have said it. He didn't.

It does not matter. It shows that God does not consider a person still married (to their first spouse) after divorce and remarriage. The woman, had she been actually married to the man she was shacking up with, would have been a "wife of one husband."

Right: and it said the woman had NO husband, not "one husband" that she was committing adultery against.

 

Wow sport, I love you, too! :laugh:

 

We are just rehashing our beliefs but I will say by the crazy logic you use, then Paul should have said polygamy if that is what he meant. (By the way both polygamy and divorce were legal at the time.)

I do not want to condemn or punish anyone who is divorced or is a polygamist (if legal), I am merely stating the fact that if a man is a polygamist or is divorced AND remarried to another, he is not qualified to be a Pastor, Elder or Deacon. It really doesn't matter what I think it matters what God says.

 

The problem I have with the dos and don'ts I see around here and on this board is the fact that the serverity of the penalty becomes directly related to our opinion about how bad the sin is. I have seen too many instances where this or that happened, and those in important places try to make a leadership role that an offender once held a life time ban. I have also seen those who shout the loudest caught in their own trap sooner or later. We have had threads about this before, but the gossip, the divisive person in the church, the unjust accuser, all of them, have no business in leadership positions as much as your adulterer and drunkard at the top of the list.

 

I do understand and agree with what you are saying. Anytime we apply our own opinions that wander away from the scripture, even just a bit, we suddenly find ourselves acting not according to God's plan for us. There are many qualification for a Pastor, Elder and Deacon; some do vary depending on the office. But, nowhere can I find that any Christian is disqualified from ministry God has many qualifications for these offices in the church, these qualifications are not meant to be somewhat are almost followed but they must all be met. I see only one that cannot be reversed but it can still be forgiven. God is not punishing anyone with disqualification whether it is for a season/s or permanent. God is setting standards for what and how He wants this done. He knows His reasons but, we still have those that decide God's reasons don't make sense to them so they adjust them as we go along.

 

Just a thought. How do you feel about a polygamist with 5 wives who divorces 4 of them. Does he now qualify by the standard of "husband of one wife" to be a pastor?

 

How would you deal with a man who had five wives and came to Christ in a country where it is a common practice for a man to have more than one wife?

 

Before I get started, you're exactly right. I wonder someday if some won't have to give account for cow-towing to the traditions of men at the expense of the truth of God (Mt 15:9)

I agree with Havensdad and Pastor Larry in particular. (Good to see you, Pastor Larry, by the way). I would add this:

The word carries the idea of being without censure, free from truthful accusation. I don't know if blameless is the meta-qualification or just one among many. I do know it does set the stage rather well. And there are qualifications to the qualifications. There are those who would hold us to accusation, but do they do so for the right reason? IOW, (I used this example in one of our other convos about this) some would hold that two pastors violate 1 Tim 3:7 because they are not well thought of by outsiders. One is thought of that way because he has a terrible credit score, bounces checks left and right, curses at waitresses, and has defrauded people. The other is poorly thought of because he opposed gay marriage, irked a group for claiming salvation is in Christ alone, and refuses to allow the local HS drama department to put on a profanity laced show in the church's sanctuary. Both are "guilty." But one is moreso than the other, if you catch my drift.

And we aren't talking about perfection necessarily. Have we all been perfectly blameless? Have we always been one woman men? Have we never had a fleeting moment where anger or covetousness crept in? These things are not to govern our lives. I'd also add that I don't know that I read anything here that wouldn't be generally fitting for any follower of Jesus.

The fatal flaw with this qualification of "one woman man" (other than the fact that people read divorce into the text) is that it's made the bene esse of elder/deacon qualification. I have literally sat in meetings where Bro. So and So is considered, and when it's determined that neither he nor his spouse have been divorced, he's approved. Forget his ability to hold the mystery of the faith or manage his household or the other qualifications. The one is elevated.

All make good points about reading what the text really does say. I appreciate people trying to uphold the sanctity of marriage and the piety of church officers. I take great offense when they twist texts to do it.

 

he doesn't have to. The prohibition "husband of one wife" excludes polygamy by definition. It does not preclude divorce. You have to add something extra, for it to apply to divorce.

No, you just want to tell God that He can't use certain men for ministry, even though He doesn't say anything about it. It is no better than the Pharisees.

Well, if it doesn't matter what you think, then quit forbidding divorced men to preach, pastor, elder, etc. God's Word says nothing about it; your additions to God's word is the only thing that forbids it.

 

I once belonged to a church that had a policy against divorced deacons and Pastors, then they voted in a Pastor that was fine with ordaining divorced deacons. They broke free from their associational ties and kind of dangled out there on their own blowing in the wind. The church congregation fell off and has never recovered. There has to be a biblical standard and a higher moral code in place so that those that are without can have confidence in those that are within.

 

So, do you also forbid people from being deacons who have lied in the past? Who have stolen in the past? Who have broken the speed limit in the past?

I agree we need a higher standard for ministers/leaders. The Biblical standard though; not our own made up standards, like "You can't be a pastor if you have ever had a divorce." How silly, that murderers like Paul are not forbidden, but according to some, men who were divorced before they were even saved ARE!!

Sorry, but there is no justification for adding to scripture, to justify men's traditions.

 

If a man has a bad reputation and the community has no confidence in him, regardless of what his trespass is\was, I would not ordain him as a Deacon, because I would not want to bring a reproach on the church. Christians know God forgives, can take away our sin, and make us a new creation in Christ Jesus, but the church is an outreach to the lost and the lost have not yet developed this concept or know the mercy and pardon of God.

 

Agreed. So such a man should hit the streets, and do the work of Christ, build his reputation, and thus become eligible for the office.

NOTHING permanently disqualifies a man from the pastorate, with the single exception of a lack of repentance (continuing in his bad behavior).

 

Like committing adultry by virtue of a divorce and remarriage - as Jesus said?

 

Although you did not put a question mark after this, I am going to treat it as one. If he hits the streets and does the work of a minister or deacon, why is it important for the church to ordain him to the position? I mean, someone can do the work of the office without the title. It reminds me of the homosexual community wanting their lifestyle to be validated by the establishment, by demanding that laws be passed recognizing their union as the same thing as the one between a man and a woman. Homosexuals need to respect those that do not accept their sinful lifestyle, just like those that are disqualified from holding an office in a particular church should respect the decision of the autonomous church body that rejects them. I'm sure there are other churches that will install them and women, too.

 

Jesus did indeed say that a divorce man that remarries commits adultery. It is a sin (other than in the case of abandonment or adultery, as Scripture stated).

But just like other cases of adultery, or other sins, when the man repents (after a time of restoration and "cleaning up one's name" I would argue), he again becomes eligible for the ministry.

"Not having committed adultery" is not a qualification for pastor. If it were, NNE would qualify, with the possible exception of people born a "eunuch."