Mississippi Shepherd

 Mr. DaveW got my attention with Matthew 19:6. I actually wrote it on the inside of the cover of my current bible 6 years ago as a testament to my wife. I've read that verse countless times, but you've managed to make me look at it from a wider angle.

When discussing the topic of the actual  meaning of "husband of one wife", a couple of times I've been told (and quite passionately) that a man is still married in the eyes of God even after he divorces, therefor giving credence to their side of the discussion that he would have multiple wives if he remarries. That's the first time that particular verse was used to substantiate that view of the topic, at least in a way that got my attention. Appreciate that! It's easier to comprehend when you don't feel like you're being stoned!

But if we believe 'husband of one wife" means he must always, even as an unbeliever, have had no more than one wife in his lifetime, wouldn't we also extend the same understanding to the other qualifications so they include his distant or pre-Christian past?

Randy Alcorn put it to the test by adding the same interpretive phrase to all the other qualifications;

"This would mean that any elder must:"

 Have always, even as an unbeliever, been above reproach. Have always, even as an unbeliever, been sober minded. Have always, even as an unbeliever, been self controlled. Have always, even as an unbeliever, been respectable. Have always, even as an unbeliever, been hospitable. Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been a drunkard. Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been violent or quarrelsome. Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been a lover of money. Have always, even as an unbeliever, managed his household well."

"This makes absolutely no sense. It requires the fruit of the indwelling Holy Spirit in pre-Christian people who by definition did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit. It also presents a pragmatic problem, since virtually no one would be elder qualified, due to past choices and lifestyles stemming from a radically different worldview and heart condition. I don’t think the passage could possibly assume one has always been elder qualified, that he has never in the past violated the character requirements of elders, only that he is presently qualified, as a result of the transforming work of God’s Spirit in the man’s life. 

So, do we believe the meaning is never having been divorced, i.e. the “husband of one wife, not just now but even as an unbeliever”? If so, what is there in the text (not just our preferential reasons of not wanting to appear to make a concession to our culture) that would cause us not to extend the same interpretive assumption to those other qualifications? " Randy Alcorn

As one man said, tongue in cheek; "Instead of divorcing her, I could have murdered my wife, got a good lawyer and got off in 5 years, repented and rededicated my life to Christ and then become a deacon."

 I've heard the side of the debate that states even after you're divorced, you are still married in the eyes of God.

Deuteronomy 24:4 lets me know exactly how God feels about divorce.

If I rephrase the question to; "Does a man who has been divorced and remarried have more than one wife?" then is there a particular verse in our bible that says, or at least points to, God still looking at you being married after the divorce?

In 1 Corinthians 4:6, Paul warned people not to "go beyond what is written."

In Revelation 2, Jesus rebuked a couple of churches for tolerating evil and false doctrine.

If the phrase "husband of one wife" is properly interpreted as "never divorced" then we should never go beyond what the word of God allows.

If "husband of one wife" does not refer to divorce, then those who have issued a blanket prohibition of service by divorced men have gone imposed human rules on God's Word and that is no small matter.

Has the growing prevalence of divorce made the baptist church compromise on the matter; or has the growing prevalence of divorce made the church study the subject and find out they were wrong?

One side of this debate is wrong and goes against God's Word. Being relatively new in my walk with Christ (compared to those raised in God's house), you can understand my concern about not being led off the narrow path, even by those who honestly feel they are right.

I do thank you for any input and guidance on the subject.

My apologies up front for any aggravation or heartache this question poses, as it seems to evoke pretty passionate responses when brought up, but

  the only way for me to learn is to ask.

If Paul intended for "The husband of one wife" to mean never have been divorced, would that include a divorce before a man was saved?

God tells us in Hebrews 8:12, Isaiah 43:25 and Psalm 103:11-12 that He not only forgives, but that He will also forget our transgressions when we turn to Him.

One gentleman told me that sin has consequences (such as unwed pregnancy or drunk driving, etc), which I agree with, but the ones he listed are societal consequences for our sin and the penalties ensued. Are we always married in the eyes of God, even if we are divorced before we become aware of His loving grace and give ourselves to Him?

Always looking for any venue that can help me find answers, explore God's Word, grow in fellowship and my walk with my Lord and Savior.

"I'm not where I need to be, but thank God, I'm not where I use to be!"