If divorced and filling the role as pastor, should other men of God back off and let

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding that leads to many of these problems about who is qualified. "Blameless" is not "one of the requirements." It is the requirement. Period. EVerything else in that list is an example of what it means to be blameless.

The "husband of one wife" means "one woman man." That is the literal translation of the phrase. A divorced man can be a one woman man and blameless. A never divorced man might not be a one woman man and might not be blameless.

This whole scenario shows another problem. We are too often willing to let a man off the hook doctrinally. We should not be. Doctrinal qualifications are just as important as others, and a man that holds aberrant doctrine is unqualified to pastor.

It is true that we should not minimize the office by having unqualified men in it. But we must use biblical qualifications, not man made ones. </font>[/QUOTE]I agree. Excellent points.

 

Plain Old Bill
"It seems sins which are unforgivable for a pastor are smoking and divorce."
"
Could we keep this little tidbit from my headpastor? He is an avid pipesmoker he is.

 

I suddenly feel called to the Netherlands. I miss my pipe.

Lacy

 

"It would be OK if he had been a murderer before he was saved and then became a pastor? If that's true, then divorced before he was saved is the same thing. Jesus said to the woman, "Go, and sin no more.""

Remember there are consquences to sin - being remarried is adultry.

And Jesus did not add at the end of the phrase "and become a pastor."

 

"Yes. it says "saving for the cause of fornication". Fornication includes adultery, does it not?"

The "excuse clause" some find here is questionable. If it is okay to divorce if your spouse is a fornicator, then the spouse would be stoned to death and the person free to remarry.

Christ knew what He was saying and how it related to the law He was living under perfectly.

 

Sometimes I miss my pipe too brother

Philippians 3
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

 

Is our God not an all-seeing, all-knowing god?
I believe that God knows everything that every individual will face in this world. Having said that, then I believe that if God knew beforehand that an individual would be divorced from their mate, and this was a disqualification for a man to preach, He would never have called him to preach (Romans 11:29 - For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.) Therefore, if God has called a man to preach the gospel to a lost and dying world, the qualification comes from God alone. I firmly believe that God does not call the qualified but rather qualifies the called. If a person becomes divorced then that person is no longer married. If they marry a second time, then they are still the "husband of one wife". If a man and woman divorce, and she marries another then, how can the man still love her as a wife without being in sin (loving another mans' wife)?
If God opens the door for His called to preach, then preach he should.

 

Surely it is clear from the Nativity story itself (Mary should have been stoned to death according to the law) that this law was by no means always applied in Israel at that time. Furthermore the woman caught in adultery presumably was not re-arrested later and then stoned.

Don't forget Israel was under Roman occupation and they could not put people to death in the way they did when they were a sovereign state. No doubt the Romans turned a blind eye from time to time, as with Stephen, but that was a case of the Sanhedrin being directly involved. Would the sanhedrin have got involved in a simple case of adultery between two peasants, and if they were not involved, would the common people have risked public stonings right under the nose of Rome? I very much doubt it.

It seems to me highly probably that there was really not a lot of use of the death penalty for offences under the Mosaic law at that time at all.

Liz

 

I don't think this logic stands up to inspection. If I told you I was called to preach, would you accept that, bearing in mind that i am a woman? What if I really truly believe I am called to preach? If you answer anything other than "then you must preach", you are acknowledging that people can get these things wrong ....

Liz

liz

 

Surely it is clear from the Nativity story itself (Mary should have been stoned to death according to the law) that this law was by no means always applied in Israel at that time. </font>[/QUOTE]Not true. When you look later at Jesus' adult life, he deals with a woman who is about to get stoned for getting caught in the act of adultery. While it's true that the Roman occupation forbade the execution of prisoners, common women were still considered property in Jewish society of the day, and the Roman occupation did not generally conern itself with such domestic affairs.

 

I don't think this logic stands up to inspection. If I told you I was called to preach, would you accept that, bearing in mind that i am a woman? What if I really truly believe I am called to preach? If you answer anything other than "then you must preach", you are acknowledging that people can get these things wrong ....

Liz

liz </font>[/QUOTE]My reply is simple....read 1Corinthians 14:32-38. If a woman is to remain silent in the church, how can she be called to preach? I knew a man many years ago that announced that he was called to preach. After a time he withdrew his statement with the reason that he was wrong. Not everyone that believes they are called are called. That is one of the biggest problems in the Baptist churches today, we have men and women in the pulpits that were not called of God but of man.

 

Of course you know those folks from Kentucky would disagree. That's how some make their money.

Could his name have been Spurgeon or Carroll?

 

I don't think this logic stands up to inspection. If I told you I was called to preach, would you accept that, bearing in mind that i am a woman? What if I really truly believe I am called to preach? If you answer anything other than "then you must preach", you are acknowledging that people can get these things wrong ....

Liz

liz </font>[/QUOTE]My reply is simple....read 1Corinthians 14:32-38. If a woman is to remain silent in the church, how can she be called to preach? </font>[/QUOTE]You are missing my point. My point is that, if whoever it was, who was arguing that the divorced man could be called to preach, would tell a woman that she cannot possibly be called to preach, then that person is acknowledging that people CAN get these things wrong. Therefore the divorced man COULD be as wrong as you would say the woman is. In other words, simply feeling a call to preach is not, of itself, any indication that one should in fact preach.

Actually i don't have a problem with a divorced man preaching, subject to the circumstances of the divorce.

liz

 

I have this problem. The marriage vows that we take say that we should....in sickness and in health.... for richer,for poorer.... till death do us part. Aren't we making an oath before God with no exceptions? I don't recall stating in my marriage vows that "all this except for fornication." Your vows aren't just to your spouse, they are to God. Does this not make a difference? God never said that it would be easy, just that he would see us through the hard times. Aren't we shorting God if we do not honor our vows to him? Just asking.

 

There is more to 'death' than meets the eye. Just as the Bible says, "Thou shalt not kill." I think that this simple commandment goes a lot deeper than most folk realize. Notice that it did not say "thou shalt not take another persons life". I believe that this verse also encompasses the ground that we should not 'kill' the influence of another person. Many a child of God has been 'killed' by loose tongues making their testimony and ministries of none effect.
Having said that, "unto death do us part", in my opinion, can also encompass a couples loss of desire and affection towards one another, to the point that their relationship is 'dead'. Rather than nurturing one another, if not controlled it can turn very nasty very quickly with back-stabbing and emotional wounds. It goes a lot deeper than I can get into right now, but if it were not for divorce there could be a lot more at stake than just their relationship. Our actions and reactions affect everyone around us. There have been many a troubled child that has taken their own life because their parents would rather stay together in a nasty relationship, because of their vows, rather than obtain a divorce.

 

I agree Liz. Not everyone that claims the "Call" is called. I have known many people that mis-interpreted their calling. It's not necessarily that they were not called to do a job, they were just confused on what their job was. If God sends the call to evangelize and that person attempts to pastor then it can certainly wreak havoc within the church as well as his ministry. I was called to preach at the age of 16. However, I did not begin to preach until age 19 for I wanted to be sure of the calling. After three years of praying and seeking Gods' wisdom I surrendered and began to preach. God has blessed my ministry and I have no doubt that I am where He wants me.
There has been many a preacher that have wasted many years as a Sunday School teacher or such because they mis-understood their calling. Not because they were not effective at the position they were in, but because they could have much more in their field of calling. Also I have known those that should have been teaching but tried their hand at preaching because they mis-interpreted their call.

So, yes Liz, people can definitely be wrong about their calling.