Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Mark And Avoid Or Spit Out The Bones?


Recommended Posts

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

The Gentiles, having not known the Law, were instructed not to hold their spouses who would not be converted, if they wanted to leave.
 

 

If what you say about verse 15 is true, how do you reconcile verse 11 and 27?  What do they then mean?  Reconcile or remain unmarried cannot mean get back together or stay single anymore.  It must mean something else.  What?

 

 

What about between Jesus and Paul?

 

Do you believe the church age started before Christ went to the cross?

 

 

If there is an apparent conflict between Paul and Christ we must look to who their messages were meant for.  Right?  That doesn't mean we ignore the 4 gospels and follow Paul or visa versa, every word in the scriptures benefits us. 

 

The bible says the law and the prophets were until John.  So yes, the church age started before Calvary, before Pentecost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The first, reconciliation, refers to believers, both spouses, while the other refers to a believer and an unbeliever.

 

Hmm...  I'll look at it further later, thanks Mike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The first, reconciliation, refers to believers, both spouses, while the other refers to a believer and an unbeliever.

 

Mike, I have considered your position and again have to reject it on biblical grounds.  Verses 12 and 13 clearly admonish the believer not to leave his or her unbelieving spouse.  The Lord then gives the reason for such in verses 14 and 16, because they and the children are sanctified and that they may get saved.  

 

God's plan for the church age is no divorce for any reason.  If it does occur, one is to remain unmarried or be reconciled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sadly, those who are unwilling to make their marriage work and choose to file for divorce are not going to accept resolving to either remain unmarried or reconcile with their spouse.

 

Even among Christian women one of the first things I hear when a woman divorces her husband is her "friends" telling her to start dating, that God will send the right man to her, that she'll be married and happy in short order.

 

Biblical teaching on marriage, divorce and remarriage is greatly lacking. Add to this the willingness of most Christians to ignore, skip or re-interpret Bible verses on these matters and it's no wonder this prOBlem plagues Christians in like manner as the lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

If what you say about verse 15 is true, how do you reconcile verse 11 and 27?  What do they then mean?  Reconcile or remain unmarried cannot mean get back together or stay single anymore.  It must mean something else.  What?

 

 

If there is an apparent conflict between Paul and Christ we must look to who their messages were meant for.  Right?  That doesn't mean we ignore the 4 gospels and follow Paul or visa versa, every word in the scriptures benefits us. 

 

The bible says the law and the prophets were until John.  So yes, the church age started before Calvary, before Pentecost. 

NoOne I included ever said to ignore any books of the Bible.  We just don't apply everything to us that's all.

 

The church of the first born is the church that the gates of hell will not prevail against and that is Israel, also known as the church in the wilderness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The church of the first born is the church that the gates of hell will not prevail against and that is Israel, also known as the church in the wilderness.

 

Well...  Christ said he would build his church and the gates of hell would not prevail against it.  That's the local New Testament Church, not Israel.  Which do you mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Mike, I have considered your position and again have to reject it on biblical grounds. Verses 12 and 13 clearly admonish the believer not to leave his or her unbelieving spouse. The Lord then gives the reason for such in verses 14 and 16, because they and the children are sanctified and that they may get saved.

God's plan for the church age is no divorce for any reason. If it does occur, one is to remain unmarried or be reconciled.

The context is OBvious, if the unbeliever wants to leave, let them go.
It is talking about a marriage where one of the partners gets saved, but not the other.
You now have light in union with darkness.
The husband is the head of the home, thus, if he is a believer, sanctified everyone under his authority.
The wife has instructions for her, if she believes first.
God allows that the Gospel carries an offense.

Anishinaabe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The context is OBvious, if the unbeliever wants to leave, let them go.
It is talking about a marriage where one of the partners gets saved, but not the other.
You now have light in union with darkness.
The husband is the head of the home, thus, if he is a believer, sanctified everyone under his authority.
The wife has instructions for her, if she believes first.
God allows that the Gospel carries an offense.

Anishinaabe

 

I'm not sure we're in disagreement here.  Whether a believer or not, God's plan for marriage today does not include divorce.

 

I might add that any believer in a home of unbelievers sanctifies that home according to the scriptures (verse 14 for example).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I'm not sure we're in disagreement here.  Whether a believer or not, God's plan for marriage today does not include divorce.

 

I might add that any believer in a home of unbelievers sanctifies that home according to the scriptures (verse 14 for example).

I agree-but God's plan also didn't include sin, death, murder, or a plethora of things that have occurred. So, for the remedy of those things, Christ died on the cross so that such things can be placed under the blood. And, in the case of marriage, while it is not God's plan, clearly, yet knowing it would happen, He gave certain allowances for those who are the 'left', if you will. If one's spouse leaves them, commits adultery and departs, particularly being an unbeliever, does the 'innocent' party then have to be found a guilty sinner when it wasn't their sin that caused it?

 

And if so, even at the worst, is it a sin that cannot be forgiven, placed under the blood of Christ, and forgotten, as with all sins? Is this the one we don't let go of? Or do we forgive men their trespasses, as we are told to do? Or is it a forgiveness with strings attached?

 

Now, certainly, there are some things that may have strings attached, so to speak-you aren't going to assign a converted child molester to a Sunday School teacher. But that's less about strings as it is protection of that person, so they are not brought into temptation, as well as the children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Well...  Christ said he would build his church and the gates of hell would not prevail against it.  That's the local New Testament Church, not Israel.  Which do you mean?

you might want to study before you comment.  A simple search of any KJV Bible program will assist you well.

 

I think that people who dont study aren't worth discussions on topics they have not studied. 

 

Look up chuch in the wilderness and the church of the first born.

 

Do so to learn not to prove an error,  many who do the later never learn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

Sometimes it doesn't matter what one thinks...AVBB, swath simply asked you a question to clarify. If you were truly interested in a discussion, you would not dismiss him as worthless to a discussion. You would answer the question.  If you want to be counted worthy to discuss things with people, stop insulting and simply answer questions asked of you. That's what discussion is. Be advised  -  don't start getting snarky again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

And, in the case of marriage, while it is not God's plan, clearly, yet knowing it would happen, He gave certain allowances for those who are the 'left', if you will. If one's spouse leaves them, commits adultery and departs, particularly being an unbeliever, does the 'innocent' party then have to be found a guilty sinner when it wasn't their sin that caused it?

 

And if so, even at the worst, is it a sin that cannot be forgiven, placed under the blood of Christ, and forgotten, as with all sins? Is this the one we don't let go of? Or do we forgive men their trespasses, as we are told to do? Or is it a forgiveness with strings attached?

 

The Lord permitted divorce for fornication because of the hardness of the hearts of the Jews under the law.  1st Corinthians 7 is the doctrine on divorce and it is not permitted for any reason now.  That being said, no, it's not an unpardonable sin to divorce or remarry another.  If Mao and Stalin made repentance before God and put their trust in Jesus Christ, they too would be redeemed.  As for strings, could that mean a man is then not eligible to pastor a church or be a deacon?  Yes, that's what the bible teaches, doesn't it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

you might want to study before you comment.  A simple search of any KJV Bible program will assist you well.

 

I think that people who dont study aren't worth discussions on topics they have not studied. 

 

Look up chuch in the wilderness and the church of the first born.

 

Do so to learn not to prove an error,  many who do the later never learn

 

So, what then is the correlation between Christ's statement and the Jewish "church"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sometimes it doesn't matter what one thinks...AVBB, swath simply asked you a question to clarify. If you were truly interested in a discussion, you would not dismiss him as worthless to a discussion. You would answer the question.  If you want to be counted worthy to discuss things with people, stop insulting and simply answer questions asked of you. That's what discussion is. Be advised  -  don't start getting snarky again.

to discuss the differences of the church of the wilderness/the church of the first born, and the the church, the body of Christ, one must study them out first to know the differences, it is OBvious by his question he has not.  So why waste time discussing with someone who does not know the topic at hand?

 

It is like knowing the differences between divorce for Israel and for the Body of Christ.  If you don't know the differences then you will blend them and so you end up going around and around like he and UKU are doing and like he does on many subjects.

 

It is like talking about the differences in a Granny Green Apple and Red Delicious if you know the differences then you can proceed along and discuss details of those difference.  But if you don;t you just keep calling them apples and lump them all together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

The Lord permitted divorce for fornication because of the hardness of the hearts of the Jews under the law.  1st Corinthians 7 is the doctrine on divorce and it is not permitted for any reason now.  That being said, no, it's not an unpardonable sin to divorce or remarry another.  If Mao and Stalin made repentance before God and put their trust in Jesus Christ, they too would be redeemed.  As for strings, could that mean a man is then not eligible to pastor a church or be a deacon?  Yes, that's what the bible teaches, doesn't it? 

Except that teaching seems to suggest a current situation, (the husband of one wife) not a past/present situation, (has had more than one wife, or has been divorced).  It could very easily be interpreted either way, depending upon your view. Your way of seeing it says that even though Jesus gave an acceptable, (not ideal), reason for divorce, and Paul gave another, they would still disqualify you from some service, meaning forgiveness but with strings.  

 

Multiple spouses in the middle east was still done at the time of the writing of the Bible, and still is in come cultures. In this case, culture was to be rejected, because the marriage between husband and wife was a picture of Jesus and His church. Thus, a husband could not have multiple wives. But if a marriage was over for a reason that was acceptable by Christ, apparently to be married again would not be seen as disqualifying one for such service.  

 

Consider the woman of Samaria, (I think I mentioned it earlier). Jesus never accused the woman of having five husbands, but of having HAD five husbands. Past. So, If I had had one wife, divorced and remarried, I would still only HAVE one wife.

 

But look, I'm not going to try and convince you any more. I'm not your pastor, and I suspect you would not acept me as such if you could, and that's fine-I have no prOBlem with that. You do as you understand to be right in the Lord's eyes and so will I and when we each stand before the Lord, we will each give account.

 

One thing I don't generally do, though-I don't endorse divorce. In fact having been there and knowing the pain it brings, I stand pretty strong against it. But a woman should not have to stay with a physically abusive husband who has no intention of changing, and a man shouldn't feel the need to stay with a adulterous wife who has no intention of changing. Both break the picture Christ intended for marriage, and if one is unwilling to seek restoration, I won't tell them they must forever remain married. But I will help them fight to keep it if there is a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Considering other NT teachings it would seem if we are truly intent upon following Christ, even presented with a terrible marriage situation, the Christian shouldn't sue for divorce. Even if there must be separation between the couple, that certainly doesn't mean divorce should accompany it. If the other spouse files for divorce, that's upon them.

 

I know many pastors put forth a whole list of "good reasons" for a Christian to divorce their spouse that has nothing to do with fornication even though Scripture doesn't list any of them as any form of biblical reason for divorce.

 

No doubt, we live in a fallen world and even Christians allow the world, the flesh and devil to lead them into sin so divorce will be a fact among the lost and saved alike.

 

The really bad thing today is what should be very rare among Christians is now as common place as among the lost. It seems most pastors simply go with the flow on this rather than taking a biblical stand.

 

From my experience, when Christians decide they want a divorce, they avoid those who will speak biblical truth to them and seek out those Christians (and sometimes even non-Christians) who will agree with them. This makes them feel better and justified in getting a divorce. Since their pastors don't preach or teach on the matter, they won't be hearing what they need to hear.

 

I find it very sad when a Christian couple divorces. This is especially so when one spouse is doing their biblical best to save the marriage but the other spouse refuses to even consider anything other than divorce. The idol of self dooms many marriages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Your way of seeing it says that even though Jesus gave an acceptable, (not ideal), reason for divorce, and Paul gave another, they would still disqualify you from some service, meaning forgiveness but with strings.  

 

Mike, we cannot have and should not accept moral relativism.  I'm guilty of it it too, it's so ingrained in our culture.  But it's not what the verses mean to me but rather what, "sayeth the Lord".

 

Christ gave no new exception for divorce.  All he did was bring the questioners back to the OT and the law.  He left the doctrine for Paul to give.  Therefore, no divorce would be acceptable to God and Christ during the church age.

 

The examples you provide as legitimate reasons in your last paragraph while seemingly prudent to you and I is still unacceptable according to God's Word.  The person being abused can and should leave, and according to the bible, remain separated or be reconciled.  

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, 13 Guests (See full list)

  • Recent Achievements

  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • 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...