Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

nodnarb

Pensacola Bible institute

Recommended Posts

I didn't say you were wrong, I simply suggested a line of study for anyone who cared.

It is always better for us to study for ourselves rather than accept what someone says.

Does the passage speak of sin or qualifications, and what impact does that have on the subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2019 at 3:04 AM, John Young said:

Wow. It is not Pharisaical to give God our best and to be Qualified. To say that it is Pharisaical to hold men to the NT qualifications of a church office is certainly not right. No one ever said they could not serve or be very valuable to God. Nor that "we are better than they" or that they have no forgiveness. Only that they should not hold on to an office to which they are not qualified.

John,

It was your own words that claimed there were men of lower degree defiling the church, and that that lower degree was due to some personal part of their life (divorce). It wasn't because they were preaching falsehoods on the foundational doctrines, or because they were teaching another way of salvation contrary to Paul's gospel, or teaching others to believe in perverted versions of the bible. It was because they didn't live up to the misinterpreted meaning of "of one wife". It was OK that God called a murderer to free his people, or an adulterer and a murderer to be king over his people, and a brawler and striker to preach the gospel of the circumcision, and a murderer and an abetter to murder to preach the gospel to the uncircumcised, but that "sin" of divorce is just too much for God to forgive & forget to call that man to preach and teach his word.

You used the terminology of higher & lower degree...And while you may claim they are forgiven...you believe and teach that their "sin" is not forgotten. And I will keep stating what I have since the start. This is Pharisaical.

Edited by SAB76
spelling corrections

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DaveW said:

I didn't say you were wrong, I simply suggested a line of study for anyone who cared.

It is always better for us to study for ourselves rather than accept what someone says.

Does the passage speak of sin or qualifications, and what impact does that have on the subject?

Ok, I must have misunderstood your post that claimed I was being offensive and juvenile with my accusations into meaning that I was wrong.

As far as the sin issue that is being addressed, It was brought to my attention that Matt. 5 & 19 and I suppose the same cross references in Mark & Luke teach that a Christian today in the church age is committing the sin of adultery when they put away their wife and marry another. With it being taught that he is married to 2 women at the same time in God's eyes. So therefore the bishop must be blameless of this sin, by being married to only one woman in his life. This seems to be the standard teaching from a lot that believe in married only once in a lifetime. And it must have been a concern or a common teaching even back in Paul's day, and so he had to preach an entire chapter on it in 1 Cor. 7, and then towards the end of it assure the people that if you marry after being loosed it was NOT a sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woah there big boy......The only place I remember John saying anything to do with "low calibre" is:

On 9/25/2019 at 12:52 PM, John Young said:

I personally believe one of the big reasons the modern church is struggling today, and lacks power is because Bishops and churches (even in the IFB types) refuse to disqualify pastors but instead make excuses for their sin and why they are minumily qualified and keep ordaining men of lower and lower caliber in stead of seeking men who are at the strictest example of the qualifications. 

And yet you accuse him of saying:

 

18 minutes ago, SAB76 said:

John,

It was your own words that claimed there were men of lower degree defiling the church, and that that lower degree was due to some personal part of their life (divorce). It wasn't because they were preaching falsehoods on the foundational doctrines, or because they were teaching another way of salvation contrary to Paul's gospel, or teaching others to believe in perverted versions of the bible. It was because they didn't live up to the misinterpreted meaning of "of one wife". It was OK that God called a murder to free his people, or an adulterer and a murder to be king over his people, and a brawler and striker to preach the gospel of the circumcision, and a murderer and abetter to murder to preach the gospel to the uncircumcised, but that "sin" of divorce is just too much for God to forgive & forget to call that man to preach and teach his word.

You used the terminology of higher & lower degree...And while you may claim they are forgiven...you believe and teach that their "sin" is not forgotten. And I will keep stating what I have since the start. This is Pharisaical.

You need to be careful with your accusations, for that is not what John said, nor even what he implied. In fact, almost exactly the opposite. He didn't say they were defiling the church, and he didn't restrict the reason to only divorce - in fact he didn't even designate divorce specifically.

And yet you go on a rant about all the other problems with churches today saying that John was ignoring those and suggesting it was ALL ABOUT DIVORCE.

In fact, John's statement includes, not excludes all of these things, because it is a general statement.

This is very close to a false accusation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2019 at 12:52 AM, John Young said:

The reason the Bishop cannot have two wives is because Christ does not have two wives. Nor does he have "one church at a time". He hated it when the Priest of the OT made excuses for their infidelity, so what makes us NT priest think we are any better or that he now thinks it is okay?!! 

"Abandonment" is also not an excuse as the Hardness of the man's heart toward his wife is why most wives "abandon" their husbands and disqualifies regardless of fault. It is a disqualifier from the office but not from service. If a man can not accept that, then it reveals his hard heart and desire to hold on to power of some-sort. A humble Bishop who has been disqualified has sorrow that he no longer is a symbol and example of Chris's marital relationship and will step down in hopes a better qualified example can fill that role. In particular so that the spirit and power of the office and the Lord's church be not hindered as shown by the rebellious priest in Malachi 2.

I personally believe one of the big reasons the modern church is struggling today, and lacks power is because Bishops and churches (even in the IFB types) refuse to disqualify pastors but instead make excuses for their sin and why they are minumily qualified and keep ordaining men of lower and lower caliber in stead of seeking men who are at the strictest example of the qualifications. 

Wanted to include the whole quote so that I do not misquote or misinterpret.

As you can see the context, the entire topic of the first 2 paragraphs is about DIVORCE. So if it was a general statement on the last paragraph, then I am not seeing it stated as such, and was only left to assume it was a statement referring back to it's preceding paragraphs degrading men that have been divorced. Perhaps, Mr Young can clarify, as I have asked him to do in a previous post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, no mincing words. This reply is aimed at SAB76. The moderators have been fielding complaints from other members about your offensive manner in this thread. Divorce or some other doctrine is not the subject of this particular reply. Offensive language is the subject. Calling other Christians "Pharisaical" is offensive and not Christ like. I gave a warning back a few replies about this sort of thing. Once again you have chosen to ignore a moderator's warning in your reply that was worded in the following manner: "And I will keep stating what I have since the start. This is Pharisaical."

If you had read the board rules posted by the owner of this board you would have seen the following:

8. We will not allow the following
a) Bashing of other message boards. 
b) Bashing of your pastor or church. ** Online Baptist is a place for fellowship, disagreements you may have with others should not be handled here.
c) Members that come just to argue doctrine instead of fellowship.

This is your last warning; if you can participate in discussions civilly and fellowship in a Christian manner, you are welcome here. If you choose to continue as you have, your time here will have come to an end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SAB76 said:

Wanted to include the whole quote so that I do not misquote or misinterpret.

As you can see the context, the entire topic of the first 2 paragraphs is about DIVORCE. So if it was a general statement on the last paragraph, then I am not seeing it stated as such, and was only left to assume it was a statement referring back to it's preceding paragraphs degrading men that have been divorced. Perhaps, Mr Young can clarify, as I have asked him to do in a previous post.

Sentences within a paragraph carry on the same thought. New Paragraphs carry on a related but new thought. 1st paragraph is about Bishops being a reflection of Christ and that their infidelity or loyalty towards Christ and how that carries over to their own wives. Second is about the "Abandonment" argument being a sign of a hard heart and a reason many lack power. The third is my general opinion that GENERAL disregard for the qualification (not just divorce) is the reason our churches lack the power of God.

The qualifications for the OFFICE are there for a reason and all I am saying is that churches should strive to get and hold men to the Highest standard of those qualifications that they can for the sanctity of the OFFICE and not make excuses for getting minimally and questionably qualified men for the OFFICE. To make this about us "not forgiving men" or about "how well" God used men in other capacities who were not qualified for this office, is wrong, and are false arguments.

Edited by John Young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, John Young said:

The qualifications for the OFFICE are there for a reason and all I am saying is that churches should strive to get and hold men to the Highest standard of those qualifications that they can for the sanctity of the OFFICE and not make excuses for getting minimally and questionably qualified men for the OFFICE. To make this about us "not forgiving men" or about "how well" God used men in other capacities who were not qualified for this office, is a false argument.

John,

Your meaning was clear the first time your made it. SAB76 miss-used your clear meaning. Your second meaning is also very clear and worth repeating.

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim_Alaska,

Thank you for pointing out me as the offending poster. I wasn’t sure whom you were speaking of. Going forward I will refrain from using the terms Pharisaical, Phariseism, or any other such terms.

I apologize for my rude and contemptible speech.

To all,

I will attempt to change my approach, and hopefully have a better discussion on this subject of divorce and or a second marriage being a sin, as well as the effects it has on the qualifications of the office of a bishop. I have listed a few questions below, and am seeking the teachings of all that care to answer them. If you feel that some are connected, then please feel free to combine them. Reading other posts on this same subject, I understand that not everyone’s teaching will be 100% the exact same. But please be exhaustive as much as possible to teach me why you see the answers in the light you present it in.

1) When does the accountability of the bishop for ALL of the qualifications go into effect?

  • ·         Please list beside each trait at what point in his life does he become disqualified for not being:

1)      blameless (Example) – The moment he broke any law (God’s or man’s).

2)      the husband of one wife

3)      vigilant

4)      sober

5)      of good behaviour

6)      given to hospitality

7)      apt to teach

8 )      Not given to wine

9)      no striker

10)   not greedy of filthy lucre

11)   but patient

12)   not a brawler

13)   not covetous

14)   One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity

15)   Not a novice

16)   have a good report of them which are without

2) What is the meaning of "husband of one wife"?

  • As I see it there are 2 interpretations 1) A man married to one woman his entire life. 2) A man having only one wife while married (i.e. Anti-polygamy). Are there more interpretations and why is the one chosen the correct interpretation?

3) Are there any exceptions (i.e. Death, Desertion, Adultery) for a man that divorced and married another woman to still meet the qualifications?

4) If there are no exceptions, and he is disqualified, what fields of ministry or offices is he allowed to partake in, and what is he allowed to do in said ministries or offices, and what scriptures are used to qualify him for use in those ministries or offices?

5) Was Judas Iscariot a bishop, and which local church gave him his bishoprick? (Acts 1:20)

6) Please clarify the way Christ loving the church means that a man’s marriage is to be a carbon copy or an earthly representation of Christ being married to one church.

  • To me there are very distinct differences between the church and a physical wife. The church does not die, wives do. The church is a city, wives are human beings. The church is spotless, pure, and a virgin, wives are not. A man’s wife has power over her husband’s body; how does that apply to the church having power over Christ’s body?
  • I am just not seeing this being what Paul was saying, but rather that he (the husband) is to love (Feel tender affection for somebody) his wife (the woman to whom a man is married) just as Christ does the church and GIVE (To present or deliver something that he or she owns to another person) himself (his body) for her. I also believe this is why Paul made his statements in Eph. 5:28-29 & 1 Cor 7:4-5.
  • If I am wrong, please show me where my interpretation is off course.

7) Does Matt 5:31-32 and Matt 19:9 apply to the born again believer in the church age? If the answer is yes, please also explain how Matt 5:22-30 applies to the believer today.

8) What is the meaning of 1 Cor 7:27-28?

9) What did Paul mean when he said “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any”? (1Cor 6:12) “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.”? (1 Cor 10:23) And does this scripture also cross reference to Gal. 5:13?

Edited by SAB76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on my phone and can't answer in-depth...sorry.

The qualifications apply to a MAN...not a child, adolescent, or teenager (in my opinion). That does away with "at any time".

The qualifications also are the traits that he is publicly known by...this goes beyond what the man is now...it covers years. Why? Because of how he is known by those not only in the church...but how he is known by those who are "without". It takes a long time for a man to establish his reputation...especially by those who are "without".

I know pastors who are popular in my community, but they don't meet the qualifications that God has ordained. Numerous church splits have resulted from these men...hard feelings and bitterness are the results. Many have adopted false doctrine...but they chalk it up to being persecuted...when neither they (nor the churches that elected them) held them to biblical qualifications. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still awaiting answers to ALL of the aforementioned questions. Do any care to respond?

 

No Nicolaitans, Firstly, thank you for your brief answer, yet I am looking for more, and would prefer scriptural answers rather than opinion and subjective views.

But with the statement you gave of it being an adult....My question is as so. So, an 18 year old that drinks, fights, steals, cheats, fornicates, etc., gets saved and stays clean into his later years can never be a pastor? Or is just the 18 year old that got married and divorced, got right and stayed clean in his later years that can't be a pastor? This is the issue that I have with teaching the "one wife" is one marriage. It creates a major double standard in the forgiveness & dare I say it yet again....the forgetfulness of God. Does not God not only forgive our sins, but also forgets that we ever committed them? (Heb 10:17) Which would include divorce and another marriage, if it were even a sin to begin with. (1 Cor. 7:27-28)

 

To all,

Again, I have asked specific questions and am looking for scriptural answers. 

I understand all are busy, and will continue to wait for the answers to my presented questions.

Thank you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAB76,

I've answered you biblically. I've answered the questions that you proposed in your last post. In fact, my answer(s) are in the post that immediately precede your latest post.

I no longer see the purpose in continuing this "back and forth" conversation on my part.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but it's going nowhere except in a circle. 

Take care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...