Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Mark And Avoid Or Spit Out The Bones?


Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

Jesus did say that divorce was ok if sexual immorality took place.  Mt 5:32 But I say unto you, That 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 committeth adultery.

 

What of a man who was married before he was saved, his wife runs off with another man, he remains faithful to her hoping for her to come back, she gets a deadly disease while off with others, and the man decides to divorce her?

 

Could he not after he got saved remarry and it not be considered he is married to two wives?

Divorce for fornication, NOT adultery, is acceptable, the difference being, adultery can be of the heart, and I believe Jesus didn't want divorce occurring every time one spouse thought the mind of the other was wandering. Had to be the physical act. Though I suspect this is what you meant, so not trying to split hairs.

 

Divorce is also acceptable if an unbelieving spouse leaves a believer-we are not under bondage to such, the Bible tells us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Divorce for fornication, NOT adultery, is acceptable, the difference being, adultery can be of the heart, and I believe Jesus didn't want divorce occurring every time one spouse thought the mind of the other was wandering. Had to be the physical act. Though I suspect this is what you meant, so not trying to split hairs.

 

Divorce is also acceptable if an unbelieving spouse leaves a believer-we are not under bondage to such, the Bible tells us.

I'm sorry, but you have me totally confused here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Divorce for fornication, NOT adultery, is acceptable, the difference being, adultery can be of the heart, and I believe Jesus didn't want divorce occurring every time one spouse thought the mind of the other was wandering. Had to be the physical act. Though I suspect this is what you meant, so not trying to split hairs.

 

Divorce is also acceptable if an unbelieving spouse leaves a believer-we are not under bondage to such, the Bible tells us.

 

Interesting point I hadn't really considered in-depth. Would a woman whose husband is unrepentently addicted to pornography then have no grounds for divorce because it was merely mental/heart adultery?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Interesting point I hadn't really considered in-depth. Would a woman whose husband is unrepentently addicted to pornography then have no grounds for divorce because it was merely mental/heart adultery?

Apparently not. Jesus specifically said 'Fornication", markedly different from Adultery, because one is physically interacting with another person, while the other is of the mind-both still sins and needing to be dealt with as such, and both, in some aspect, certainly dishonoring to the spouse, but not both a divorceable offense. Biblically-speaking.

 

Of course, we also have: "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife." (1Cor 7:4) and I believe THIS deals with physical, uhhh...self-satisfaction, for lack of a better, cleaner term. However, still not divorceable.

 

I am a divorced man. My foirst wife left me for another man, came back for a short time, and left again with yet another man. I gave her many years of waiting time, but after living with two other men as their wife, and then accepting a ring from one, I chose to let her go-I figure I had done all I needed to fulfil all I could in a godly manner. She has since gone off to live the life of a reprOBate from the faith in most ways. I won't elaborate any more than that.  But even having said this, I believe that we, even Christians, find way too many tings we consider worthy of divorce. I fought it tooth and nail from start to finish. But biblically, I believe I did all I could. Even in this, I submitted myself to God and repented of what I may have done to be implicit in the divorce.

 

But before I was separated, before I even knew there was a prOBlem, I was called to be a preacher. The divorce put me off the track for a time, but I believe the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. God wasn't surprised by my wife leaving me but He still called me. I tried to turn away from the call but was continually pulled back, virtually given no choice. Its hard to explain, but those who are pastors may understand better than those not. I have regularly told the Lord that if He would bring someone to take over, who was more qualified, that I would willingly step down, but not unless that occurred, because I don't believe it is His will that a church shut down if not necessary. But He knows my heart and willingness, and thus far, no one has come who is either willing, and very few qualified, to take over as pastor. So I believe it is God's will I remain until such time as He removes me.

 

Do I take my experience over His word? Of course not-from what I read and understand in His word, I am the husband of one wife, the one I am married to today. The former one left me as apparently an unbeliever and an adultress, and as such I am no longer married to her, thus, the husband of one wife. The experience just confirms it. 

 

No one here has to agree or come to my church-this is just where I am. For what it's worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Of course there is-we are not to be tale-bearers or gossips, or bearing false witness. But that is not marking one who is truly in error or blatantly spreading false doctrines.  

 

Going strictly by your story, what she did was wrong, if she hadn't checked her facts, and she was wrong about what she said. Of course, she could have been in error and had she a right heart, upon being presented with factual information, she should have changed her story, If she did not, and in fact refuses to do so, then she is a liar and should, herself, be publicaly marked.

 

But when we have good information, facts, that one is spreading falsehoods or has removed themselves from the faith, they should be marked-not as an enemy, mind you, but as a danger, because a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. As a pastor, it would be in the best interests of my church to publicly mark someone who is a fale teacher. If I am found wrong, though, I should be willing and eager to retract what I said, just as publicly, and give a public apology to the one I had inavdertently slandered.

 

But we are still to mark when the need arises.

If I handed you a telescope or microscope and you started yelling into it like it was a microphone, what would I think of you?

 

Instead of clearly understanding Romans 16:17, this "pastor's wife" (and the pastor backed her actions as well)

has committed the act of spreading false rumors and back-biting and verballying slandering a great man of God.

She clearly is blind-as-a-bat as far as understanding this scripture:

 
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark skopeō them which cause divisions and offences
contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them
 
As a result, I have since "avoided" these "-ites".  I suspect she gets her "Hog-wash" from the "Hog-yard"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Apparently not. Jesus specifically said 'Fornication", markedly different from Adultery, because one is physically interacting with another person, while the other is of the mind-both still sins and needing to be dealt with as such, and both, in some aspect, certainly dishonoring to the spouse, but not both a divorceable offense. Biblically-speaking.

 

Of course, we also have: "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife." (1Cor 7:4) and I believe THIS deals with physical, uhhh...self-satisfaction, for lack of a better, cleaner term. However, still not divorceable.

 

I am a divorced man. My foirst wife left me for another man, came back for a short time, and left again with yet another man. I gave her many years of waiting time, but after living with two other men as their wife, and then accepting a ring from one, I chose to let her go-I figure I had done all I needed to fulfil all I could in a godly manner. She has since gone off to live the life of a reprOBate from the faith in most ways. I won't elaborate any more than that.  But even having said this, I believe that we, even Christians, find way too many tings we consider worthy of divorce. I fought it tooth and nail from start to finish. But biblically, I believe I did all I could. Even in this, I submitted myself to God and repented of what I may have done to be implicit in the divorce.

 

But before I was separated, before I even knew there was a prOBlem, I was called to be a preacher. The divorce put me off the track for a time, but I believe the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. God wasn't surprised by my wife leaving me but He still called me. I tried to turn away from the call but was continually pulled back, virtually given no choice. Its hard to explain, but those who are pastors may understand better than those not. I have regularly told the Lord that if He would bring someone to take over, who was more qualified, that I would willingly step down, but not unless that occurred, because I don't believe it is His will that a church shut down if not necessary. But He knows my heart and willingness, and thus far, no one has come who is either willing, and very few qualified, to take over as pastor. So I believe it is God's will I remain until such time as He removes me.

 

Do I take my experience over His word? Of course not-from what I read and understand in His word, I am the husband of one wife, the one I am married to today. The former one left me as apparently an unbeliever and an adultress, and as such I am no longer married to her, thus, the husband of one wife. The experience just confirms it. 

 

No one here has to agree or come to my church-this is just where I am. For what it's worth.

 

That's an interesting answer. I had always considered adultery as a type, or subset, of fornication. It's an intriguing thought, but I'm not yet fully on board with the idea of it being a distinction between physical and non-physical interaction. John 8:3-4 seems to describe adultery as a physical act and the adultery of the heart passage (Matt 5:28) seems to indicate that the common understanding was that adultery was physical, but Jesus extended it to non-physical. Thus, when I read Matt 5:23 I understand the provision for divorce to be all kind of sexual sin to include adultery. Thoughts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

That's an interesting answer. I had always considered adultery as a type, or subset, of fornication. It's an intriguing thought, but I'm not yet fully on board with the idea of it being a distinction between physical and non-physical interaction. John 8:3-4 seems to describe adultery as a physical act and the adultery of the heart passage (Matt 5:28) seems to indicate that the common understanding was that adultery was physical, but Jesus extended it to non-physical. Thus, when I read Matt 5:23 I understand the provision for divorce to be all kind of sexual sin to include adultery. Thoughts? 

generally, I would say nthat they are pretty much part and parcel, but it gives me pause when Jesus spoke that adultery can be committed in the heart, while fornication can't, due to the specifically physical nature of it. Thus, when He says that fornication, not adultery, is worthy of divorce, it gives me pause to think that He is speaking of acting out on the wicked thoughts.

 

A murderer in God's eyes is one who thinks hatefully about a brother without a cause, but to man, we can't convict them until they act upon those thoughts and end, or attempt to end, a life. So the same with adultery and fornication-we can commit mental adultery, but divorce cannot occur until it is acted upon in fornication, (or perhaps attempted fornication?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

generally, I would say nthat they are pretty much part and parcel, but it gives me pause when Jesus spoke that adultery can be committed in the heart, while fornication can't, due to the specifically physical nature of it. Thus, when He says that fornication, not adultery, is worthy of divorce, it gives me pause to think that He is speaking of acting out on the wicked thoughts.

 

A murderer in God's eyes is one who thinks hatefully about a brother without a cause, but to man, we can't convict them until they act upon those thoughts and end, or attempt to end, a life. So the same with adultery and fornication-we can commit mental adultery, but divorce cannot occur until it is acted upon in fornication, (or perhaps attempted fornication?).

 

Makes sense to me. I think we are on the same page here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Interesting...well I guess there's no arguing with that...your reasoning is just too solid. It's a good thing we could discuss this as adults to be sure we both had a proper understanding of Scripture...

They were spelled out as a list of requirements.
If no one meets the requirements, then no one gets installed in the office.
What is there to discuss?

You want me to agree that "no one is qualified", so we can ignore the list, or make it a suggestion , not a command, before you will discuss it.

We have to accept the Word of God, before we can discuss it.



Anishinaabe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

If I handed you a telescope or microscope and you started yelling into it like it was a microphone, what would I think of you?

 

Instead of clearly understanding Romans 16:17, this "pastor's wife" (and the pastor backed her actions as well)

has committed the act of spreading false rumors and back-biting and verballying slandering a great man of God.

She clearly is blind-as-a-bat as far as understanding this scripture:

 
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark skopeō them which cause divisions and offences
contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them
 
As a result, I have since "avoided" these "-ites".  I suspect she gets her "Hog-wash" from the "Hog-yard"

 

I see what you are saying, but keep in mind that we have great examples from Paul of how those he marked, he also warned about. Yes, mark them, pay attention to them, notice them and take heed to avoid them, but we also have a responsibility to warn others about them. Paul named names, gave issues, made them public-shouldn't we also, so long as we have good information?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

They were spelled out as a list of requirements.
If no one meets the requirements, then no one gets installed in the office.
What is there to discuss?

You want me to agree that "no one is qualified", so we can ignore the list, or make it a suggestion , not a command, before you will discuss it.

We have to accept the Word of God, before we can discuss it.



Anishinaabe

 

All I wanted was an honest discussion on whether or not we had an accurate understanding of what that verse says because I disagree that it's as plain as you seem to think it is; but nevermind. I truly have no interest in discussing anything with you now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I see what you are saying, but keep in mind that we have great examples from Paul of how those he marked, he also warned about. Yes, mark them, pay attention to them, notice them and take heed to avoid them, but we also have a responsibility to warn others about them. Paul named names, gave issues, made them public-shouldn't we also, so long as we have good information?  

I might also make another "OBservation" concerning this particular "congregation".  Rather than being "spiritual" and thus gentle and kind,

they seem to "focus" on having an angry spirit concerning things totally outside their control, such as certain "conspiricies" of a particular

religious order and (progressive) "liberalism" in general.  Perhaps they do not really trust the Holy Spirit... or perhaps even worse...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

All I wanted was an honest discussion on whether or not we had an accurate understanding of what that verse says because I disagree that it's as plain as you seem to think it is; but nevermind. I truly have no interest in discussing anything with you now.

You summarily dismissed the literal interpretation.
Now you want to discuss what?

How can "must be" not mean "must be"?

Anishinaabe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

While the OP doesnt necessarily speak to this exactly. In terms of "eating meat and spitting out bones" I think personal decernment helps a lot... I personally had to stop listening to Todd friel, as the gaggle of calvinistic theology played in clips by paul washer and company just ate away at my Joy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

You summarily dismissed the literal interpretation.
Now you want to discuss what?

How can "must be" not mean "must be"?

Anishinaabe

 

Didn't dismiss anything, but I don't care to dig it back up. Pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I might also make another "OBservation" concerning this particular "congregation".  Rather than being "spiritual" and thus gentle and kind,

they seem to "focus" on having an angry spirit concerning things totally outside their control, such as certain "conspiricies" of a particular

religious order and (progressive) "liberalism" in general.  Perhaps they do not really trust the Holy Spirit... or perhaps even worse...

Well, I certainly can't argue with you that there are those who allow their zeal to give them a poor spirit and attitude. These are the kinds that give other believers a bad name. I certainly have no prOBlem with warning ministries, so long as they are done with kindness and wisodm, and well-document what they are saying. After all, Jeremiah and Isaiah and Ezekiel definitely had warning ministries, particularly to israel, but much can be applied to the NT believer who takes for granted what the Lord has done for him, of those who seek to  include ungodliness and error in the work.

 

A great example would be, of course, the well-known 'god hates fags' "church", Westboro Baptist. They are just bubbling over with zeal, without an ounce of discernment or Christian love to be seen. Of course, they're an extreme example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

What exactly are you confused about? I did put this out in a bit of haste, so maybe I wasn't as clear as I meant to be. Please allow me to clarify

You seem to suggest that only adultery can be committed in the heart and/or that married men can only commit adultery but not fornicate.

 

Matt. 15:19-  For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

 

It all comes from the heart and thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

That's an interesting answer. I had always considered adultery as a type, or subset, of fornication. It's an intriguing thought, but I'm not yet fully on board with the idea of it being a distinction between physical and non-physical interaction. John 8:3-4 seems to describe adultery as a physical act and the adultery of the heart passage (Matt 5:28) seems to indicate that the common understanding was that adultery was physical, but Jesus extended it to non-physical. Thus, when I read Matt 5:23 I understand the provision for divorce to be all kind of sexual sin to include adultery. Thoughts? 

I'm sure there's a Greek word somewhere to explain it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 34 Guests (See full list)

  • Recent Achievements

  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Eagle One

      Havent been on for years, but have been studying with Jews for Jesus weekly Bible Study which has been wonderful.  Not sure any of your views on that group, but if you are from a Jewish background a great place to be grounded in the word and to learn.
      · 0 replies
    • Barbara Ann

      I am a researcher and writer at Watch Unto Prayer which I started 25 years ago. On this website there are many well-documented articles and audio programs by myself and other researchers whose ministry is to expose the endtime apostasy of the Church. Now more than ever Christians need information in order to identify and avoid the various deceptions that are in nearly all the churches.
      My husband and I attended the IFB Bible Baptist Church of James Knox a couple of years ago. We left the church after we were informed by the assistant pastor that we were not allowed to express views to other members that do not agree with the views of the pastor and leaders of the church. We were not introducing heresy but expressing our views concerning the State of Israel. We had never been in a church which forbade private conversations on issues where there are diverse opinions. This we recognized as cultlike control of church members. To inform Christians, my husband, who is also a researcher and writer, started a website on the subject: Zionism Exposed: A Watchman Ministry.
      · 0 replies
    • Free Spirit

      Jesus said:"I am the truth, the way, and the life. No man can come to The Father, but by Me."
      · 0 replies
    • Richg  »  BrotherTony

      Brother Tony, I read your reply on Anderson, I know you all think I'm argumentative but, when you don't agree.....the first thought I had is, I wish you would introduce me to the guy that hasn't sinned, maybe David, that had a man killed so he could commit adultery, yet, he was & is a man after Gods own heart, or maybe Paul the guy that persecuted and had Christians killed, or maybe Richg or Kent H, or even you ! I used to listen to personalities also when I was younger but today and for some time, my only concern is, does it line up with scripture & to me its hilarious that you think "I'm in a fix" LOL, I interpreted what we've discussed perfectly, not because I'm smart, but because with an open mind to things of God, its an easy read.
      · 1 reply
    • Richg  »  Jerry

      I thought you wanted me to stop talking to you !
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...