Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         14
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Fornication and divorce question


Roselove
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Members

When Jesus says the only way you can divorce your wife and it be permitted, is if she commits fornication (either before or during betrothal, I suppose), is it a situation where the woman would be married to the person she had relations with, in God’s eyes (relations=marriage?) or was it not something that had to be done, but would be permissible for other reasons? 

Basically, what if the woman was truly repentant of her past actions and truly loved and wanted to be a good wife to the man. Would the man have to not be with her, to be in God’s will, because by God’s law, it would be forbidden, or is it something you can choose to do, if you decide that you can’t trust her or it was shameful in appearance or something? 

Also, is a marriage only legitimate if one of them is saved? I think I’ve heard that, but wanted clarification. 

I hope my question makes sense! 

Thank you

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're asking about fornication and divorce.

Regarding marriage...my belief is that whether the couple are both Christians, if neither of them are Christians, or only one of them is a Christian...they are bound to one another in God's eyes. He ordained marriage without specifying the couple's belief system. There may be biblical and secular reasons for divorce..."but from the beginning it was not so." (Matthew 19:8)

If I'm wrong, I will both accept it and acknowledge it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Relations do not equal marriage. 

God may have permitted this divorce ‘because of the hardness of their hearts’, as Jesus said, but we see fairly clearly that He hates divorce. I believe it’s safe to say that divorce is never mandatory in His eyes; if the union can be saved, He wants that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

“But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭7:28‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 

What does this mean? Is it a sin then, for a non-virgin woman to be married to someone besides the man that had relations with her, first? 

Well, I also have read the virgin in regards to a woman can just mean “maiden”, too. So maybe I was interpreting it wrong. Not sure.

Edited by Roselove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

That specific section relates to Paul's opinion that it's  better to stay single rather than get married, but that in the end, it's not a sin to get married. 'Trouble in the flesh' is just a fact of binding two sinful people together (in that everyone is a sinner, not that those two in particular committed fornication). This passage doesn't refer at all to fornication and the consequences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I've heard it so many times that it's considered"fornication" only premarital or during the "betrothal" period. But I know of three (3) families, baptists, in which the husband went to prison for molesting the children. If that isn't "fornication" I don't know what is. It would be so with an offending wife as well.. The Bible says ''except it be for fornication'';' otherwise, marriage is always holy and legitimate.

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 12/20/2019 at 8:31 AM, heartstrings said:

I've heard it so many times that it's considered"fornication" only premarital or during the "betrothal" period. But I know of three (3) families, baptists, in which the husband went to prison for molesting the children. If that isn't "fornication" I don't know what is. It would be so with an offending wife as well.. The Bible says ''except it be for fornication'';' otherwise, marriage is always holy and legitimate.

That is so, horrible. That would be such a horrifying thing to learn of someone at your church, especially! 

Are you saying a person that’s ever committed fornication of any kind, isn’t allowed to ever be married, though? I still think it could be allowed if found out, but not sure if it would actually make the marriage, illegitimate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Members

Is there no room in the marriage room for mercy, repentance, forgiveness or grace?

For IBs to place marriage into a topic which is so hard and fast that all prohibitions and labels always apply actually gives Seventh Day Adventist arguments for an unchanging Sabbath validity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, Spd1275 said:

Is there no room in the marriage room for mercy, repentance, forgiveness or grace?

For IBs to place marriage into a topic which is so hard and fast that all prohibitions and labels always apply actually gives Seventh Day Adventist arguments for an unchanging Sabbath validity.

I fear this post makes no sense to me.

Mercy, repentance, forgiveness and grace are always available. However, none of the 4 have actually have anything to do with the consequence of sin.

You can have an affair, get aids, repent and beg for forgiveness from God and man, fully receive that forgiveness, but you still have aids.

Get drunk, drive and hit someone. Can you get forgiveness? Yes. Are you still going to jail? Yes.

Break the holy bond between man and woman set up by God. Will you be forgiven? Yes. Is there mercy? Yes. Are there still consequences? Yes.

I have counseled so many people over the years that although their cheating spouse gives grounds for divorce, they biblically may not re-marry. I've always been ignored. Always. Everyone of them has an unhappy, unfortunate second marriage today. One of those is my baby sister. Her second husband was an IFB pastor. Who had been divorced himself before salvation. He left his pulpit a couple of Sundays ago after the morning message where he "pastors" his IFB, KJV only baptist church , went home and told her out of the blue he wants a divorce.

Not every command or prohibition of God is easy. But they all bear consequences if ignored, reasoned and explained away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Weary Warrior, thank you for responding. Of course sin has consequence. Always. 
I grew up in a church that relegated the divorced/remarried to a back row. Regardless of their own guilt, they were branded and tarnished forever. Of course those who passed judgement were the gossips, strict legalisms and probably unsaved membership.

i am sorry you have never met a happily 2ndmarriage couple tho. I happen to be one of those. Ya see, I was a pastor, and I fell. That was 25 years ago. I have not preached since, nor would I. But I later did remarry, and we celebrate 25 years in a few months.

God has used me in other ways after my brokenness and repentance. Unfortunately for most of us IBs, we have historically branded our fallen with a giant A on the forehead, then taken them out and shot them.

And THAT extreme is what I refer to as the SDAdvenist line of reason for insisting on Sabbath worship.

 

Edited by Spd1275
Misspelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
7 minutes ago, Spd1275 said:

Weary Warrior, thank you for responding. Of course sin has consequence. Always. 
I grew up in a church that relegated the divorced/remarried to a back row. Regardless of their own guilt, they were branded and tarnished forever. Of course those who passed judgement were the gossips, strict legalisms and probably unsaved membership.

i am sorry you have never met a happily 2ndmarriage couple tho. I happen to be one of those. Ya see, I was a pastor, and I fell. That was 25 years ago. I have not preached since, nor would I. But I later did remarry, and we celebrate 25 years in a few months.

God has used me in other ways after my brokenness and repentance. Unfortunately for most of us IBs, we have historically branded our fallen with a giant A on the forehead, then taken them out and shot them.

And THAT extreme is what I refer to as the SDAdvenist line of reason for insisting on Sabbath worship.

 

Don't misunderstand me, I have met happy second marriages, just not those I have counseled away from it. And I do not believe that happy constitutes right.

I do fully agree with you that a person who finds themselves in the position in life is not to be cast aside, and that God absolutely can use them, although not in the pastorate. I also fully agree that we in the IFB have had a general propensity over the years to shoot our wounded and fallen.

To me, one of the greatest challenges to face the church today is how do we find balance? Balance between standing uncompromisingly for Biblical truth, while maintaining grace for those who, like all of the rest of us, have come up short.

For example, it is just as unbiblical for some IFB pastor in Arizona (who shall remain unnamed) to preach God hates gays and that they can't get saved as it is to preach God loves everybody and gays are welcome in the church, unrepentant and unchanged. It's a drastic example, but I guess it illustrates (maybe) how my thought process runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Finding balance is a difficult road because it requires us to practice Biblical Church Discipline. That is tough when your head deacon is “sharp” in his financial dealings, or when your church secretary (that everyone loves) is also Queen Gossip. It is simple to keep an LBGT out.

And we really need to get think Biblically. I suppose you are welcoming of ALL, but just as nit-picky as can be who is allowed to formally join and serve. And our problem likely originates in the 5 minute professions we rack up as we beat the doors of the neighborhood down. If a pastor has never been burned by some instant convert someone made a deacon the next week, then they just haven’t lived long enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
15 minutes ago, Spd1275 said:

Finding balance is a difficult road because it requires us to practice Biblical Church Discipline. That is tough when your head deacon is “sharp” in his financial dealings, or when your church secretary (that everyone loves) is also Queen Gossip. It is simple to keep an LBGT out.

And we really need to get think Biblically. I suppose you are welcoming of ALL, but just as nit-picky as can be who is allowed to formally join and serve. And our problem likely originates in the 5 minute professions we rack up as we beat the doors of the neighborhood down. If a pastor has never been burned by some instant convert someone made a deacon the next week, then they just haven’t lived long enough.

Yep. I welcome all through the doors, and all are welcome to sit and hear the truth. "They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick". However, it's takes a clear testimony of salvation, Biblical baptism and 3 months of faithful attendance to apply for a voting church membership. And public service in the church (music, teacher, deacon, secretary/treasurer etc.) are much more restricted. I consider church ministers of any kind to be much like a wife or a mule. A good one is priceless, but anything less is a $3.00 nightmare, and I'm better off without 'em. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Members
On ‎12‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 11:04 PM, Roselove said:

When Jesus says the only way you can divorce your wife and it be permitted, is if she commits fornication (either before or during betrothal, I suppose), is it a situation where the woman would be married to the person she had relations with, in God’s eyes (relations=marriage?) or was it not something that had to be done, but would be permissible for other reasons? 

Basically, what if the woman was truly repentant of her past actions and truly loved and wanted to be a good wife to the man. Would the man have to not be with her, to be in God’s will, because by God’s law, it would be forbidden, or is it something you can choose to do, if you decide that you can’t trust her or it was shameful in appearance or something? 

Also, is a marriage only legitimate if one of them is saved? I think I’ve heard that, but wanted clarification. 

I hope my question makes sense! 

Thank you

 

Apostle Paul stated to us that God views the marriage between a lost and saved as legit, and that the believer must try to make it work out, but if the unbeliever decides to depart and divorce, that person now freed to remarry again a saved person....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
18 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Apostle Paul stated to us that God views the marriage between a lost and saved as legit, and that the believer must try to make it work out, but if the unbeliever decides to depart and divorce, that person now freed to remarry again a saved person....

14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

It doesn't exactly say "freed to remarry" does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Fornication, simply, is any sexual act outside of the marriage relationship. 

On 2/5/2020 at 8:06 AM, heartstrings said:

14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

It doesn't exactly say "freed to remarry" does it?

Well, it DOES say the believer is not bound, (ie, the bond of marriage) to the unbeliever, which would naturally imply they are free to marry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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.

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By ChristianUnderground
      I am new to this forum, and I specifically came here to see the IFB views about Divorce, Re-Marriage, Adultery and Ministry.  I am an IFB and have wrestled for years about this topic, because of my desire to be in the ministry.  I can say that this has been a subject of great debate since the 1st century and, knowing that God is not the author of confusion, I can only conclude that Satan has used this to divide churches and create sects that do not glorify God.  One thing is clear to me; "The husband of one wife" means what it says.  A one woman man, committed to the one he is married to, whatever the situation, be it death or divorce...BUT, I must continue!
      First of all, I would like to say that we are not under the Law in the sense that our flesh must perform all that is written or perform sacrifices to atone for the wrong we have done, but Grace did not abolish it: on the contrary, Grace fulfilled it all in Christ.  We are new creatures in Him which is a great miracle in itself.  But being a new creature does not mean that anything goes in the church.  Nothing in the Law itself gave the commandment "Thou shalt not Divorce".  Moses allowed it only because of the hardness of men's hearts.  But, the Law did say "Thou shalt not commit Adultery".  Jesus went on to teach that even if you look on a woman to lust after her, you have committed adultery with her in your heart.  Is the issue here really Divorce, or is it Adultery?  If the issue is Divorce, then I am convicted that the issue is settled.  But, if the issue is Adultery, then no man has the right to be a Pastor or Deacon under Jesus' definition of Adultery.  Now, there is no man in the ministry who would admit to this secret sin, and any man that would say that he has never committed adultery is a lier.   But, Jesus Himself linked the two together.  Adultery and Divorce go hand in hand.  Not that both the husband and wife committed it, but someone in the relationship did and Divorce was the outcome.  But the two are also separated in some cases.  The lack of Adultery is not listed as a requirement for being a Pastor or Deacon, but Divorce is.  Why?  Also, to be a Pastor or Deacon one must be blameless!  Who of you that fill the pulpit is blameless?  The answer of course is NO ONE! So, what are we to do? 
      It is unfortunate that today sex is everywhere.  The clothing that men and women wear in the secular world is unbelievable, to say the least.  We would have to wear blindfolds to keep from looking a second time.  So, I believe that for this debate, everything must be simplified because I believe Jesus made it simple.  Divorce is Adultery. You just can't get around it.  I have tried, and the conviction of the Holy Spirit will not allow it!  ANYONE who Divorces his wife SAVE FOR THE CAUSE OF FORNICATION, causes her to commit adultery (Matt 5:32, Matt 19:9).  Now, we can slice it, dice it, filet it, and beat it to death, but, Divorce is Divorce, and if you have divorced, there is NO scripture that will support a man being a Pastor or Deacon.  I have tried to get around it, but have always been convicted to the contrary.  I believe the following to be the reason.
      First of all, there are still those men that are available for ministry that God has CALLED to be Pastors and Deacons, (although this too is waning in this present evil world).  Men who are married to their first and only wife.  The reason for this requirement is first, for those exact men, and second, because of the world.  If we do begin to fill the offices of Pastors and Deacons with Divorced men, then it will erode marriage (more and more Pastors or their wives will be tempted to Divorce), it will diminish the offices, and it will bring controversy and contempt from the World.  Remember; Rom 14:21  "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."  Therefor, I will not allow myself to do a great disservice to the church or the Kingdom of Heaven by allowing myself to be ordained as a Pastor of Deacon.  Can I still preach?  Yes.  Can I still serve in the mission field? Yes.  I can do any other thing but fill these offices FORMALLY. I have been disqualified.  Also, I believe that those in these offices have a responsibility to not, through action or inaction, create an environment that seemingly makes Divorce an unpardonable sin. Use those whom God has given to you to use the gifts the Spirit of God has given them.  Don't be guilty of quenching the Holy Spirit in someone's life. 
      I also must remind the reader that if men were to regard the requirements of 1 Tim 3:2,12, and Tit 1.6, then I fear there would be no Pastors or Deacons.  So, the argument could be made that our standards have become relaxed in filling these offices.
      So, I exhort everyone that reads this to do the Word, preach the Word, quench not the Spirit, love the brethren, don't do anything that will cause a Brother or Sister to stumble and above all else, love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your spirit.  AMEN
    • By Jordan Kurecki
      Many point to this passage to teach divorce and marriage in the case of adultery:
       
      Matthew 19:9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
      similar wording is also found in Matthew 5
      I believe the exception clause refers to

      1. Incestuous marriages (See Leviticus 18) (I also believe all sodomite "marriages" and sad that I have to say in our time and age but beastiality "marriages" would also be invalid as well, though I realize our passage in question relates to husband putting away a wife)
      2. Betrothal unfaithfulness

      Matthew 1:19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

      Deuteronomoy 22:13-21

      If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
      And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
      Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
      And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
      And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her,saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
      And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;
      And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
      But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
      Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil

      Some other things to consider:

      1. The NT teaching for Husbands
      Eph 5:25-28
      Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
      That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
      That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

      If Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, how can we justify someone putting his wife away for adultery? Does Jesus divorce us and end his relationship with us when we are unfaithful to him?

      2. Suffering for righteousness

      1 Peter 2:20-21 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
      For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

      3. God hates divorce

      2:14-16 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.
      And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.
      For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.

      Matthew 19:4-8 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
      And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
      Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
      They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
      He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

      4. Other NT Passages

      1 Corinthians 7:10-11 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

      Romans 7:2-3

      For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
      So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

      5. When you make a vow that "Till death do us part" I do not believe adultery gives you the right to break that covenant and promise you made to your spouse to love them and care for them "Till death do us part". 

      6. If you were committing adultery, would you want your spouse to divorce you? or would you want her to love you and pray for you until you came to a place of repentance? We are to do to others as we would have done unto ourselves.

      Just some final notes, I do not see how the verse in Corinthians that says "is not under bondage" can mean they are free to remarry, in my opinion that is something read into the passage. Also I realize that under the Law of Moses God allowed remarriage, however, it is said that was for the hardness of their hearts, I do not think God ever was happy with any kind of divorce, God clearly hates divorce, and New Testament Christians should go far beyond the letter of the law of the Moses because we have the Spirit of God indwelling us.
    • By That Guy
      Hello, I'm new here. Literally 10 minutes new. I'll just jump right into the reason I signed up, and decided to post. I'm hoping there's hope for guys like me. I got married before I was saved, and divorced before I was saved, and that was 17 or 18 years ago. I'm older, but by no means old (40), and have a lot of life left in me if The Lord permits me to live a long life, or doesn't come back first. Everything I've seen says I cannot remarry, and since my original wife was unsaved, and is now remarried there's no hope of reconcilliation.
       
      Some Christians do go on to marry again regardless, but it doesn't look like that's something that God's going to permit. Feeling pretty hopeless about life. What's a guy to do? Any thoughts? Did I just mess up, and that's the end of that?
    • By Standing Firm In Christ
      Suppose you are a young adult male who works for a company that has a CEO and a superintendent over you.
      One day, the CEO tells you that you are no longer to come to work on Tuesdays; that only females are allowed to work that day.
      Later that day, the superintendent calls you into his office and tells you you are expected to work for four hours every Tuesday.

      Who do you OBey? Would you not go to the CEO to get the confusion straightened out?

      Well, look at God as the CEO and the pastor as the Superintendent. God's Word says that His tithe is to go to Jerusalem. He gives no other location that it must go. He also says it is to be agricultural in nature. He gives no other options.

      The pastor says, "Tithe to the Church where you are fed," and "Tithe money."

      Uh-oh... conflict of interest. LOL

      So what do we do? We go to God for the answer. We ought to OBey God rather than men. So if we are going to tithe. it's best to do it in the manner that God prescribed, is it not? Otherwise, it is not OBedience to God, it is OBedience to man who is teaching something contradictory to what God says.

      Thankfully, God does not hold us to the Law of the tithe. In Romans 7 we are told that if the saved go to the house of the Law, it is an act of adultery. Let us strive to be faithful to Christ and not be guilty of going to the house of the Law while married to the One who was raised from the dead. RWR
    • By Nick S
      Hi there, 
       
      I've actually been raised a Southern Baptist but I hope you don't mind me posting here. 
       
      I've just found out that my parents might be getting a divorce, my father doesn't abuse my mother and hasn't cheated on her, though he has shown physical violence toward other members of my family. 
       
      I have no idea what to think - My dad is away on business and I don't even know if he's coming home again or not. If you could please send your prayers to my mom and dad I would really appreciate it, that they might find a way to reconcile their differences and work together to fix their marriage.
       
      I'm so confused and don't know what to think about any of this. Sorry for the rambling. 
       
      Many thanks, and God bless,
       
      Nick x
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 22 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...