Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Divorce

Forum Quick Jump

92 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 4/5/2003 10:25 AM (GMT -6)

I wonder if the reason this thread has ended up here is because it is taking a private grievance into a public forum.

Thanks,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

selah
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210

Posted 4/5/2003 3:57 PM (GMT -6)

quote:

(CONTINUED)

...rather than truly examining his and his church's Biblical response to divorce.

Edited by - bob on 04/05/2003 5:10:10 PM

Bob,

As I've said, I care about you and your marriage... I also attend WH church. Please try not to generalize my "response to divorce" as part of what you perceive to be "his" (Greg's)Church's response. Much of this thread has been rather non-productive and not a Biblical response either. {2 wrongs don't make a right--right?}

If possible,I would like to help. If you write to me at my email address (rather than in public) I will walk with you and help you get through this hard time.

love,
selah

Then He showed me the river whose waters give life, sparkling like crystal, flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb. Rev. 22:1

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/6/2003 1:13 PM (GMT -6)

Bob,

I was told by an elder at WH that WH decided as policy not to deal with sexual immorality as a church discipline issue unless it is in the context of a house church. If a person who calls themselves a christian, but is living in adultry or fornication, attends their church they will not do anything about it. This person can attend their church and be involved in all the activities, get their friends to come, bring their children. They can even call it their "church". WH will do nothing about it. This person can even counsel other people to divorce (Yeast, I Cor. 5). They don't care.

The only time they care is if the person calls themselves a christian and is involved in a house church. That house church may exersize discipline and not have the person come anymore. But they still will be able to come to the "big church".

As Greg said the key is relationships. Not to God, but to other people.

According to I Cor. 5, we are not to judge the unbeliever who lives in sexual immorality. They are already condemed. They won't or shouldn't be members by their very confession. However the so called christian who "names the name of Christ" and is living in sexual immorality is to be brought through the prosess of restoration. If it does not work they are to be given to satan for the destruction of their flesh and not fellowshiped with. We are to judge the so called believer. Their very action of sexual immorality is making a statement of: "I do not trust God with my life. I will not follow His ways. I will feel better about my life if I don't follow Gods word."

In other words, their behavior is contrary to their statement of faith. By calling oneself a Christian they are saying, I trust God with my life. I will delight in Him no matter the cost. Then they don't live it out. Somethings wrong. And Paul gives the receipe to straighten the problem out.

Their are two reasons for church discipline. 1. Wrong doctrine and 2. Sinful behavior. The verse can be found in my responce to Debjo.

I cor. 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, not adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

11: And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

We are made for God and not for sexual immorality. Christians who live in sexual immorality are sending the wrong message to the world and to the church. Paul says discipline them. And he says that they are not even believers. They will not inherit the kingdom of God.

It would be best to type out I Cor. 5 & 6 and let the Bible explain itself, but I don't have the time.

Debjo
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 3

Posted 4/6/2003 5:12 PM (GMT -6)

I have been so saddened by this thread. I have wanted to jump in at times and have decided not to because I see no benefit from it. But at last I have to get my two cents in. I don't know if this is allowed or not, but I would like to quote from one of my favorite authors, Brennan Manning, from the book Ragamuffin Gospel. It is a lengthy quote and I hope you take the time to read it.

Chapter One "Something is Radically Wrong"

"Something is radically wrong when the local church rejects a person accepted by Jesus: when a harsh, judgemental and unforgiving sentence is passed on homosexuals; when a divorcee is denied communion; when the child of a prostitute is refused baptism; when an unlaicized priest is forbidden the sacraments. Jesus comes to the ungodly, even on Sunday morning. His coming ends ungodliness and makes us worthy. Otherwise, we are establishing at the heart of Christianity an utterly ungodly and unworthy preoccupation with works.....

Any church that will not accept that it consisits of sinful men and women, and exists for them, implicityly rejects the gospel of grace. As Hans Kung says, 'It deserves neither God's mercy nor men's trust. The church must constantly be aware that its faith is weak, its knowledge dim, its profession of faith halting, that there is not a single sin or failing which it has not in one way or another been guilty of. And though it is true that the church must always dissociate itself from sin, it can never have any excuse for keeping any sinners at a distance. If the church remains self-righteously aloof from failures, irreligious and immoral people, it cannot enter justified into God's kingdom. But if it is constantly aware of its guilt and sin, it can live in joyous awareness of forgivenss. The promise has been given to it that anyone who humbles himself will be exalted.'

The story goes that a public sinner was excommunicated and forbidden entry to the church.

He took his woes to God, "They won't let me in, Lord, because I am a sinner."

"What are you complaining about? said God. "They won't let Me in either."

Often hobbling through our church doors on Sunday morning comes grace on crutches - sinners still unable to throw away their false supports and stand upright in the freedom of the children of God. Yet, their mere presence in the church on Sunday morning is a flickering candle representing a desire to maintain contact with God. To douse the flame is to plunge them into a world of spritual darkness.

There is a myth flourishing in the church today that has caused incalcuable harm - once converted, fully converted. In other words, once I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, an irreversible, sinless future beckons. Discipleship will be an untarnished success story; life will be an unbroken upward spiral toward holiness. Tell that to poor Peter who, after three times professing his love for Jesus on the beach and after receiving the fullness of the Spirit at Pentecost, was still jealous of Paul's apostolic success.

Often I have been asked, "Brennan, how is it possible that you became an alcoholic after you got saved?" It is possible because I got battered and bruised by loneliness and failure, because I got discouraged, uncertain, guilt-ridden, and took my eyes off Jesus. Because the Christ-encounter did not transfigure me into an angel. Because justification by grace through faith means I have been set in right relationship with God, not made the equivalent of a patient etherized on a table.

We want ever-sharp spirituality (push-pull, click-click-one saint that quick) and attempt to cultivate a particular virtue at a given point in time. Prudence in January, humility in February, fortitude in March, temperance in April. Score cards are provided for toting up gains and losses. The losses should diminish if you expect to meet charity in May. Sometimes May never comes. For many Christians, life is a long January......

Because salvation is by grace through faith, I believe that among the countless number of people standing in front of the throne and in front of the Lamb, dressed in white robes and holding palms in their hands (Rev. 7:9), I shall see the prostitute from the Kit-Kat Ranch in Carson City, Nevada who tearfully told me she could find no other employment to support her two year old son. I shall see the woman who had an abortion and is haunted by guilt and remorse but did the best she could faced with grueling alternatives; the business man besieged with debt who sold his integrity in a series of desperate transactions; the insecure clergyman addicted to being liked, who never challenged his people from the pulpit and longed for unconditional love; the sexually-abused teen molested by his father and now selling his body on the street, who, as he falls asleep each night after his last 'trick' whispers the name of the unknown God he learned about in Sunday school; the deathbed convert who for decades had his cake and ate it, broke every law of God and man, wallowed in lust and raped the earth.

"But how?" we ask. The the voice says, "They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

There they are. There we are-the multitude who so wanted to be faithful, who at times got defeated, soiled by life, and bested by trials, wearing the bloodied garments of life's tribulations, but through it all clung to the faith.

My friends, if this is not good news to you, you have never understood the gospel of grace.

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 4/6/2003 5:33 PM (GMT -6)

Thank you, Debjo. That was a beautiful word, timely and appreciated.

Thanks,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

bob
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 46

Posted 4/7/2003 10:02 AM (GMT -6)

p.s. I too, Debjo, have been saddened by this thread.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/7/2003 1:00 PM (GMT -6)

Debjo,

Are you saying that people who don't repent are going to heaven?

Are you saying that people that remain in sin after they name the name of Christ are going to heaven?

Unfortunatly you are giving false choises. These people after recieving Christ (if they had in your example) should have paid the price of faithfulness to their groom (christ). They can do this by following Romans 12:4 - In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. There's the standard.

Like Bob said, repentence is the key. Christian remaining in sin are to be judged and thrown out of the church if they don't repent.

Debjo, you may quote some nice sounding words from some human. Next time give me the word of God to prove your point.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/7/2003 1:23 PM (GMT -6)

Debjo,

I think heaven is going to be full of people who confronted the religious leaders of the day of their sin and complacency. These people like John the Baptist who were not afraid of man, but God, are the ones who will inherit the kingdom of God. Like Paul who told Peter not to be a hypocrite. Like Those who were stoned, and sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated- of whom the world was not worthy- wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided somehthing better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.

I Cor 5:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, not adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, not thieves, nor the greedy, nor durunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Would any of your examples fit the above verses. If I read your post correctly they would come under I Cor 5:9.

bob
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 46

Posted 4/7/2003 1:44 PM (GMT -6)

Nothing can be more cruel than the leniency which abandons others to their sin. Nothing can be more compassionate than the severe reprimand which calls another Christian in one's community back from the path of sin.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Debjo
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 3

Posted 4/7/2003 3:56 PM (GMT -6)

This is against my better judgement, but here goes....

JOHNSON:Are you saying that people who don't repent are going to heaven?
DEBJO: Depends on what you mean by repent. If they have named the name of Christ and acknowledged their need for a savior. Believe that Christ died for their sins etc. but are still in a paticular sin that they have not repented of, then my answer is yes.

JOHNSON:Are you saying that people that remain in sin after they name the name of Christ are going to heaven?

DEBJO: Yes. I don't believe that when you come to a saving knowledge of Christ that you become instantly free from all your old ways. It is a process. Otherwise salvation is by works, a list of do's and don'ts not by grace. This keeps people from Christ, thinking that they have to get their "act" together before they can become a Christian or living in fear of not being the "perfect" Christian before their legalist brothers and sisters.

JOHNSON:Unfortunatly you are giving false choises. These people after recieving Christ (if they had in your example) should have paid the price of faithfulness to their groom (christ). They can do this by following Romans 12:4 - In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. There's the standard.

DEBJO: And of coarse this is the standard that you live by. Resisting all sin to the point of shedding your blood. You never sin? You never sin in your anger? If you do sin in your anger are you a believer? Should you be put out of the church until you get your sinful anger under control? Do you sin? At what point are you not trusting God in your sin. Which sin is worthy of church discipline? Do you overeat, do you have lustful thoughts, do you have unkind thoughts toward another believer? Are only those sins that can be seen by other's the only ones to be disciplined? Are they worse than sins of hate toward other's? Are your sins "small" and therefore don't need to be judged? You have no sin that you repeat or remain in or backslide into?

JOHNSON:Like Bob said, repentence is the key. Christian's remaining in sin are to be judged and thrown out of the church if they don't repent.

DEBJO: I am just wondering who is the judge of which the sins are that get tossed out of the church? Does anyone who gossips habitually get put on the same list as a divorced person? Does a man who is not loving his brother or sister as Christ loves them get thrown out? Who is it that judges those hearts? You? In a church of a thousand people or more you think you have the wisdom and insight to judge rightly? In the sin of divorce...in a church of a thousand people or more...the people are strangers to you...you say you can rightly judge who is the guilty party. You are willing to put someone up to public discipline not knowing the intimate details of the relationship? His word against her word? You are willing to judge the complicated mess of a broken marriage and choose which party is the one to be be disciplined? You have more wisdom than anyone I know, if you can do that.

JOHNSON: Debjo, you may quote some nice sounding words from some human. Next time give me the word of God to prove your point.

DEBJO: I am not trying to prove any point. I am just giving another another view. But if you want scripture this one comes to mind. Matt. 7: 1-5

Having said all I have and having quoted from Ragamuffin Gospel I would now like to say that I agree that sin needs to be dealt with. Just not in the way that Bob and Johnson are saying.

Bob and Johnson, I believe we will never agree on how sin is to be dealt within a church. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

Debjo

"Living in the awareness of our belovedness is the axis around which the Christian life revolves. Being the beloved is our identity, the core of our existance...It is the name by which God knows us and the way He relates to us." Brennan Manning

bob
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 46

Posted 4/9/2003 1:14 PM (GMT -6)

Here is an EXCELLENT paper on "church discipline" explained very well. It was written by J. Hampton Keathley III, Th.M., a 1966 graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary and a former pastor of 28 years who taught New Testament Greek at Moody Bible Institute. I found it on the Bible Study Fellowship (BSF) website. I encourage you to read it... it explains church discipline (the whys, whens, and hows) very, very well.

www.bible.org/docs/theology/eccles/churdisc.htm

An excerpt: "Though church discipline is a very difficult area of doctrine and one hard to practice, it nevertheless rests upon the divine authority of Scripture and is vital to the purity, power, progress, and purpose of the church. The responsibility and necessity for discipline is not an option for the church if it obeys the Word of God, but a church must be equally concerned that Scripture is carefully followed in the practice of church discipline."

Edited by - bob on 04/09/2003 6:17:40 PM

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/19/2003 9:15 AM (GMT -6)

Greg, I said, “Unfortunately, WH teaches that since God did not know what would happen in the future, he gives the option to get out. Spouses then turn to looking for ways to escape their marriage instead of ways to make it better. Emotions end up being the sovereignty, rather than God. The decisions end up being made on the bases of personal feelings rather than the joy of Gods word. It ends up being like a wicca conference. One can say "I am at peace with God", at the same time be living in adultery. And the church will be silent because one can not judge anyone else.

“WH teaches that God does know what would happen in the future? You said, You sure?”

Yes! WH teaches that God does not know what will happen in the future of free will people and angels/demons. He only knows possibilities, all of them. It is easier for God to predict evil.

In my book that is the same as not knowing the future. Your view turns God into a “psychic hotline” God. Knowing possibilities is not knowing the future.

“Because of this spouses turn to looking for ways to escape marriages? Greg said, Foreknowledge prevents divorice?”
I say, Nice try, but weak. Non foreknowledge does not give permission for divorce. But you say it does. You say that God did not know it was going to be so bad a relationship, so he will let you out of it for any reason i.e. irreconcilable differences.

Because of this emotions end up being the sovereignty rather than God? You said, “Foreknowledge (which you're sure WH teaches against?) keeps emotions in check? “
Yes, WH teaches against the classical definition of foreknowledge. You change the definition of foreknowledge to ”being able to predict.” That is not foreknowledge.

WH becomes like a wicca conference? You said, “ Wicca teaches against foreknowledge too?”
Yes, but the point was that emotions overrule scripture in how you deal with divorce at your church.

Because WH teaches God doesn't know what would happen people are "at peace with adultery"? You said, ” Reeeaaallyyy”
Yes, Reeaaallyyy. There are a number of men and women at your church living in adultery and at peace with God because of what you teach.

And because people don't judge each other no one confronts adultery? You said, You sure about this? Wow.
Yes. Adultury is not dealt with at your churchin a biblical way.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/19/2003 9:29 AM (GMT -6)

S.B.G , you said,

To carry the “we are all judges” thing through to its logical conclusion, two parties would basically be holding "Divorce Court" in church...what a humiliating, boundary-crossing circus that would be!

Please read Cor. 6:1-8 (ESV)
When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, [6] but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? [7] To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?

But you yourselves wrong and defraud—even your own brothers!

It seems to me this is saying that if you take a divorce to the courts you are crossing boundaries. The church is where it is to be dealt with.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/19/2003 11:05 AM (GMT -6)

Debjo,

Do you read the Bible? Could you support some of your statements with scripture for me.

JOHNSON:Are you saying that people who don't repent are going to heaven?
DEBJO: Depends on what you mean by repent. If they have named the name of Christ and acknowledged their need for a savior. Believe that Christ died for their sins etc. but are still in a paticular sin that they have not repented of, then my answer is yes.

J. My answer is no. Are you saing that one who calls themselves a Christian and is living in fornication, adultery, or drunkenness is a Christian? If you are the Bible says different. Cor. 6:9-11 (ESV)
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, [10] nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

JOHNSON:Are you saying that people that remain in sin after they name the name of Christ are going to heaven?
DEBJO: Yes. I don't believe that when you come to a saving knowledge of Christ that you become instantly free from all your old ways. It is a process. Otherwise salvation is by works, a list of do's and don'ts not by grace. This keeps people from Christ, thinking that they have to get their "act" together before they can become a Christian or living in fear of not being the "perfect" Christian before their legalist brothers and sisters.

J. Look again at the above verses and tell me how what you are saying corresponds to what the bible says. Salvation is by Gods gift of faith alone. If I am saved I will repent. If I am saved I will put away the former life. I am commanded to do these things. One who does not change their ways has and is lying to the people they are telling that they are saved. Behavior is a measure by which to judge wether one is saved or not. That is what I Cor. 5 and 6 are about. Have you read it yet?

JOHNSON:Unfortunatly you are giving false choises. These people after recieving Christ (if they had in your example) should have paid the price of faithfulness to their groom (christ). They can do this by following Romans 12:4 - In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. There's the standard.
DEBJO: And of coarse this is the standard that you live by. Resisting all sin to the point of shedding your blood. You never sin? You never sin in your anger? If you do sin in your anger are you a believer? Should you be put out of the church until you get your sinful anger under control? Do you sin? At what point are you not trusting God in your sin. Which sin is worthy of church discipline? Do you overeat, do you have lustful thoughts, do you have unkind thoughts toward another believer? Are only those sins that can be seen by other's the only ones to be disciplined? Are they worse than sins of hate toward other's? Are your sins "small" and therefore don't need to be judged? You have no sin that you repeat or remain in or backslide into?

J.Again, Debjo the point is repentance. Which is according to what I read in your writings, not important. And yes, if one has sinful anger they should be put out of the church if they do not repent. Yes, only those sins that are seen can be disciplined. Unless you too are a psychic hotline believer. Debjo, if I do have some sin that you see in me then you can, in love, come to me and point it out. No problem. I would see that as being your responsibility as a believer to do so. That is why all these people are pronouncing O.T. as heresy. It is done in love to point out the idolatry and error of this teaching.

JOHNSON:Like Bob said, repentence is the key. Christian's remaining in sin are to be judged and thrown out of the church if they don't repent.
DEBJO: I am just wondering who is the judge of which the sins are that get tossed out of the church? Does anyone who gossips habitually get put on the same list as a divorced person? Does a man who is not loving his brother or sister as Christ loves them get thrown out? Who is it that judges those hearts? You? In a church of a thousand people or more you think you have the wisdom and insight to judge rightly? In the sin of divorce...in a church of a thousand people or more...the people are strangers to you...you say you can rightly judge who is the guilty party. You are willing to put someone up to public discipline not knowing the intimate details of the relationship? His word against her word? You are willing to judge the complicated mess of a broken marriage and choose which party is the one to be be disciplined? You have more wisdom than anyone I know, if you can do that.

J. Have you read I Cor. 5 and 6 yet? This question is answered there. Just like the answer to your above statement is to take the time to do it, please take the time to read the scripture. Please don’t build your straw man on what I have not said by implying that the intimate details are not known. Find them out and then do the judging. Judges in secular courts don’t know the intimate details until they are told them. And Yes, I can do what you question me about above. It is not that difficult. Besides that, WE ARE COMMANDED TO DO IT. Therefore, because I delight in God, I will. Do you want to give me a real situation. I will be glad to show you how it works.

JOHNSON: Debjo, you may quote some nice sounding words from some human. Next time give me the word of God to prove your point.
DEBJO: I am not trying to prove any point. I am just giving another another view. But if you want scripture this one comes to mind. Matt. 7: 1-5

J. Matt. 7- 1-5 is not another view. It is the view I am pointing out which is how to judge. Did you read verse 5. You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. This verse is not saying don’t judge. It is showing the consequences of judging and how to judge and to make sure you are not doing the same thing the person is whom you are judging.

debjo: Having said all I have and having quoted from Ragamuffin Gospel I would now like to say that I agree that sin needs to be dealt with. Just not in the way that Bob and Johnson are saying.
Bob and Johnson, I believe we will never agree on how sin is to be dealt within a church. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

J, Maybe not, but at least give your biblical basis for how to deal with sin, including how you would treat I Cor. 5&6, Jude, Second and Third John, Second Peter 2, First Timothy 1:20, Second Timothy 2:14-26, Matt. 18. How do these verse, since they are Paul and Peters words and actions as to how they would deal and did deal with sin, fit into your system of discipline. So far you have only given your reasoning based on what you feel would be the right thing to do.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 4/25/2003 2:30 PM (GMT -6)

Why does the bible forbid divorce and remarriage of those who divorce and whose spouces are still alive?

1. God hates divorce. Malachi 2:16 (NIV) "I hate divorce" says the Lord god of Israel. God likens it to violence and commands us to be faithful.

2. Doing what God hates violates the greatest commandment in the law. matthew 22: 37-8 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all they heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.

A great question to ask ourselves is, Why would God say He hates divorce?

1. Divorce requires covenant breaking, which is foolish. Ecclesiastes 5:4-5, When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, that that thou shouldst vow and not pay.

2.Divorce requires vow breaking, which is sin. Deut. 23:21. When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be a sin in thee.

3. Divorce requires a person (spouces) to go to court against each other. ICor. 6:1-8, To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? But you yourselves wrong and defraud- even your own brothers!

4. Jesus relates divorce to adultery. Matt. 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:

5. Jesus teaches that remarriage of a divorced person is adultery. Matt. 5:32... and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

to be continued latter.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/2/2003 2:23 PM (GMT -6)

continued...

6. If we look at the context of Jesus' teaching about adultery, Jesus puts in His emphasis that going back on you word (marital vow) is evil. Matt 5:37, ESV, Let what you say be simply "yes"' or "no": anything more than this comes from evil.

7. If you look ferter in the context we see how Jesus exposes the unBiblical spirit of divorce suits. Matt 5:39, ESV, But I say to you, do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

8. Again in Matt. 5:44-45,Jesus exposes the uncharitable nature of divorce. But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven.

9. In Matt. 5:23-24, Jesus values reconciliation above acts of worship. So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

10. Jesus teaches that even if your partner is wicked, divorce demonstrates the hardness of your own heart. matt. 19:8 ESV, He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce you wives, but from the beginning it was not so."

11. Matt. 19:10, Jesus' disciples showed the magnitude and understanding of the depth this kind of commitment is. The disciples said to him, "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry."

...to be continued. By the way, Bob, where are you?

GregBoyd
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818

Posted 5/4/2003 1:16 PM (GMT -6)

Johnson: Yes! WH teaches that God does not know what will happen in the future of free will people and angels/demons. He only knows possibilities, all of them. It is easier for God to predict evil.

Doc: I hold this view. But unless I'm mistaken, its not what WHC teaches. Maybe I'm mistaken. You seem pretty confident.

Johnson: Your view turns God into a “psychic hotline” God. Knowing possibilities is not knowing the future.

Doc: It woud seem the "psychic hotline" analogy would fit better with the view that God did know all that was to come to pass. But in any case, knowing possibilities is knowing the future if your view of the future is that it is partly composed of possibilities. You obviously presuppose a different view of the future.

Johnson: Greg said, Foreknowledge prevents divorice?”
I say, Nice try, but weak. Non foreknowledge does not give permission for divorce. But you say it does. You say that God did not know it was going to be so bad a relationship, so he will let you out of it for any reason i.e. irreconcilable differences.

Doc: a) I say that non-foreknowledge gives permission for divorce??? Heck, I didn't even know I said "non-foreknowledge."
b) Its not clear to me how God not knowing how bad a marriage will turn out equates to him letting someone out of a marriage for any reason.

Johnson: Because of this ("non-foreknowledge") emotions end up being the sovereignty rather than God?

Doc: Have you found that open theists like myself tend to let their emotions rule their lives?

Johnson: Yes, WH teaches against the classical definition of foreknowledge.

Doc: Dang, then I've got to get rid of half my overseer board. They aren't believing what WH teaches!

Johnson: There are a number of men and women at your church living in adultery and at peace with God because of what you teach.

Doc: Well, I'm certainly glad my teaching is attracting adulterers. I'm hoping the church becomes a veritable magnet for tax collectors and prostitutes as well. But I'm not clear how my teaching at WHC on open theism (can you help remember a sermon where I preached this?) actually encourages them to be "at peace" with their adultery, tax collecting and prostitution.

It's like people are walking around thiking, "Since my future is open and God knows it as open I'm totally cool with adultery."

Your logic, Johnson, is... well.... "interesting."

Your research into what WHC teaches is... well... just as
"interesting."

Blessings on ya

Greg

"The responsibility is with the chooser -- God is blameless." Plato, Republic, 10.

S.B.G.
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 143

Posted 5/5/2003 10:52 AM (GMT -6)

Johnson,

Technically, I believe the Corinthians were taking frivolous cases to the court and it ended up making Christians look like a bunch of disagreeable, petty people who can’t get along. Paul would rather they “suffer wrong” and take the high road than get bent out of shape over wordly disputes. During that time period divorce was merely a man giving his wife a certificate of divorce, it wasn’t a court thing, so I’m not completely convinced that Paul was including divorce in his phrase “grievances among you” ---although he may have been. Additionally, I hardly think Divorce is a trivial matter.

With that said, I am not pro-divorce. (Neither is Woodland Hills or Greg Boyd) It is a traumatic and sad thing. My heart cheers when people happily report that they have been married for 20 years or more. However, I realize that sometimes divorce is out of a person’s control, and my issue is the degree with which the church steps in and asserts its control.

A marriage is a legally binding agreement. So unfortunately, a couple MUST involve the law to become legally divorced ---even if they obtain church approval. In Minnesota, divorce is “no fault”. The divorce itself is not the dispute—distribution of property and custody of the children are the disputes. In my opinion, if two people have settled on a divorce, they should go to a mediator, put down the equitable split on paper, and have the mediator sign it. There need not be more “court” involvement than that.

IF however, they actually want to save the marriage, they can chose to invite friends whom they trust into the situation. No one needs to be part of the problem who cannot play a part in solving the problem. No one needs to be involved who hasn't been invited to be involved. Trust has to be earned, understanding has to be gained.

Proverbs 25.2 “It is the Glory of God to conceal a matter: and the glory of kings to search out a matter.” Jesus is not in the business of shaming. When the men wanted to stone the woman who was caught in adultery, Jesus wrote each man’s sins in the sand; for their eyes only, and to be quickly washed away. Enough was said to get the point across, without humiliating the men.

In my opinion, the sorting of the actual divorce dispute should be done with a private counselor if at all possible, because:
1. This person is qualified to counsel marriages
2. It ensures privacy and comfort levels if they divorce
3. It ensures enjoyment of church fellowship without the embarrassment of personal problems and shortcomings exposed if they chose to stay together

You would be kidding yourself if you think the general congregation could engage naturally after the “hearing.” Human nature is not as gracious as our Lord who throws our sins as far as the East is from the West. People remember, and they form opinions and as their self righteousness grows it hurts the whole body.

As Greg has tried repeatedly to point out, the first churches where Paul’s counsel was given were home churches with small numbers of people…the relationships were strong, trusting, and private. Chances are, a couple would be receiving advice from their “church” all along. This is VERY different than if WH decided to jump all over Bob’s husband when they’re only getting piece meal information from two injured parties. Especially when you consider that the stories are most likely only each person’s PERCEPTION and may not even be reality. (There’s three sides to every story; yours, mine and the truth)

You seem also to presuppose that the church is in agreement that divorce is NEVER an option. I personally do not think this is the case. Sometimes it is inevitable, for instance:
If only one person wants to save the marriage. You can give a husband and wife all the advice and admonitions in the world, but if one person refuses it won’t do any good! Sometimes trust has been irreparably ruined, that is why Jesus says “except…”
If one partner is causing the other serious emotional or physical abuse, and sees no need to change or is unwilling to change, there is only so long the abused party can remain in the situation. “A crushed spirit, who can bear?”

CAN everyone change? YES!! WILL everyone change? NO, it takes a willing heart.

Different people respond to different styles of persuasion; some would come running back if the church ostracized them in order to end the loneliness and shame. But most would run farther and farther away from the church (and even God) in search of unconditional love. But both actions would be reactionary, and most likely not healthy.

JOHNSON:Like Bob said, repentence is the key. Christian's remaining in sin are to be judged and thrown out of the church if they don't repent.

Scary, scary comment. I hope this never becomes your reality. “Forgive us as we forgive our debtors”…throw us out as we threw them out?

Spiritual abuse is very real, we must walk in love and humility.

S.B.G.

To understand and to be understood is bliss.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/7/2003 12:30 PM (GMT -6)

S.B.B.,

You said, Technically, I believe the Corinthians were taking frivolous cases to the court and it ended up making Christians look like a bunch of disagreeable, petty people who can’t get along. Paul would rather they “suffer wrong” and take the high road than get bent out of shape over wordly disputes.

I say, Where did you come up with the idea it was frivolous cases. It does not state that. It (I Cor. 6:1ff) calls them; 1)grievences, 2) going before the law, 3)going before the unrighteous, 4) Saints are going to judge the world, 5)the world is going to be judged by you, 6) we are going to judge angels, 7)we are to judge matters pertaining to this life, 8)This is to your shame, 9)To have LAWSUITS at all is a defeat already, 10)You defraud your own brothers.

Paul does not say this is for trivial lawsuits. He mocks the Corinthian Church (which by the way in I Cor. Paul spends alot of time mocking their behavior, or maybe better put, judges them with sarcasim) by asking them if they are so incompetent they can't even try trivial cases. That is a whole world away from saying that they church was only to deal with trivial cases. Paul even says, I say this to your shame. Can it be that no one is wise enough to settle a dispute?

How trivial is it that we will be judging angels? How trivial is it that the saints will judge the world? How trivial is it that Paul says, "How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!? It's not trivial at all! It is serious business.

I will have to disagree with you based on what is writen in the text. There is no infrerence to stating that they are frivolous - although some of them may be.

Paul does not say they should suffer wrong and take the high road rather than get bent out of shape over worldly disputes. He says, The Corinthians are the defrauders, they are defrauding each other. Paul tells them to settle their disputes in the church not before unbelievers (vs. 5). If you are going to take it to the secular courts then it is better to be defrauded.

You said, " During that time period divorce was merely a man giving his wife a certificate of divorce, it wasn’t a court thing, so I’m not completely convinced that Paul was including divorce in his phrase “grievances among you” ---although he may have been. Additionally, I hardly think Divorce is a trivial matter.

I say, You again have no basis for this. But if you are correct then divorce would be a trivial matter because as you said you could just give a certificate of divorce. That sound trivial to me.

First of all, IT IS A GRIEVANCE - DIVORCE. No one in there right mind would say that it isn't. Why are all the verses I have quoted in the prior post apply to other people, but when it comes to our spouces then we can ignor them?

Second of all, "a certificate" That makes it a legal document to show other people. The same goes on today in the state of mn if both sides agree.

Third of all, I cor 6 is an extention of I cor 5. dealing with sin in the church. I cor 6. is explaining how to deal with what is going on in I Cor. 5.

More to follow...

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/7/2003 1:12 PM (GMT -6)

S.B.G.,

You said, However, I realize that sometimes divorce is out of a person’s control, and my issue is the degree with which the church steps in and asserts its control.

I say, Yes, divorce is sometimes out of a persons control. The hardening of the divorcers heart is terrible. The degree the church is to step in is spelled out in the verses we have discussed. They are to step in and deal with it.

You said, A marriage is a legally binding agreement. So unfortunately, a couple MUST involve the law to become legally divorced ---even if they obtain church approval. In Minnesota, divorce is “no fault”. The divorce itself is not the dispute—distribution of property and custody of the children are the disputes. In my opinion, if two people have settled on a divorce, they should go to a mediator, put down the equitable split on paper, and have the mediator sign it. There need not be more “court” involvement than that.

I say, Who establishes the legally binding agreement? The State does along with the church. When you get married the pastor is the one who marries you with the states permision. One doesn't need a pastor but they are an option that MN allows. Therefore the Pastor and the church that gave him his authority legally binds the couple in marraige along with the state. Why is it O.K. for the "church" to do a legally binding marraige, but you say it can't be involved in settling a divorce or any other disputes?

I disagree with you on the divorce not being the dispute. For most if not all Christians the one not wanting to divorce, the divorce is the dispute. The one divorcing is holding it over the other person saying if you don't divorce me then I'm going to get you in court.

Your example can happen and does often happen but not always. Especially when one wants to stay in the marraige and there are children involeved.

You said, "IF however, they actually want to save the marriage, they can chose to invite friends whom they trust into the situation. No one needs to be part of the problem who cannot play a part in solving the problem. No one needs to be involved who hasn't been invited to be involved. Trust has to be earned, understanding has to be gained.

Proverbs 25.2 “It is the Glory of God to conceal a matter: and the glory of kings to search out a matter.” Jesus is not in the business of shaming. When the men wanted to stone the woman who was caught in adultery, Jesus wrote each man’s sins in the sand; for their eyes only, and to be quickly washed away. Enough was said to get the point across, without humiliating the men.

In my opinion, the sorting of the actual divorce dispute should be done with a private counselor if at all possible, because:
1. This person is qualified to counsel marriages
2. It ensures privacy and comfort levels if they divorce
3. It ensures enjoyment of church fellowship without the embarrassment of personal problems and shortcomings exposed if they chose to stay together

You would be kidding yourself if you think the general congregation could engage naturally after the “hearing.” Human nature is not as gracious as our Lord who throws our sins as far as the East is from the West. People remember, and they form opinions and as their self righteousness grows it hurts the whole body."

I say, This is why I let the bible do the talking and not personal feelings. What you just said totally contradicts what the Bible says in how to deal with sin and divorce. Except for the first paragraph about bringing friends into the picture. That is the beginning of the Matt. 18 reconcilliation process.

The qualification should be based on biblical knowledge rather than secular psychology. Your example of "enjoyment of church fellowship without the embarrassment of personal problems and shortcomings exposed if they chose to stay together. is great for steps one and two of Matt. 18 but not step three - expultion from the church to the one who has hardened there heart and pursued the divorce.

Your asumption that the "hearing" is before the church is not correct. The hearing would be before the church if it got to the point of one deciding to leave. Yes, then things would be exposed like they will be on judgement day. I think there would be a lot less divorce because of the example it would set to other believers that this is serious business in the church and not frivolous.

Which is more hurtful, exposed sin or hidden sin. I cor 5:6, Your boasting is not good. Do you know know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

Why does WH insist on protecting Christians who are living in unrepentent sin? Why don't you care about them enough to go through the biblical process of church discipline so that they can be restored to Christ. I can't believe that in a church your size that there are not Christians living in unrepentant adultery that you need to deal with to the point of kicking them out of your fellowship.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/7/2003 1:33 PM (GMT -6)

S.B.G.,

You Said, "As Greg has tried repeatedly to point out, the first churches where Paul’s counsel was given were home churches with small numbers of people…the relationships were strong, trusting, and private. Chances are, a couple would be receiving advice from their “church” all along. This is VERY different than if WH decided to jump all over Bob’s husband when they’re only getting piece meal information from two injured parties. Especially when you consider that the stories are most likely only each person’s PERCEPTION and may not even be reality. (There’s three sides to every story; yours, mine and the truth)

I say, Greg can point it out until the Day of the Lord. He's wrong. I Cor. was writen to the Church at Corinth. All the small churches got the letter as well as the rest of the churches, even today's church. Paul wasn't even a member of the Corithian church. He didn't even know the guy he gave over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh. It had been "reported" to him. This letter was writen to the Big Church in Corinth and everyone there saw it. It was also writen as an example for us to follow in our churches today.

S.B.G., why do you chose to describe the way a church is to deal with sin as "jump all over Bob's husband". No, of course not, one doesn't jump all over. One is to gently restore a brother caught in sin. BUT YOU ARE TO DO IT. Instruction, reprove, correct so that the man of God may not be lacking. (?) I hear you saying the church is to do nothing. When the Bible says to do something and this is what you are to do in the worst case sceanerio - kick them out. I don't think you are willing to do this biblical counsel. And I don't even think that you or WH thinks that it is to involve itself in church discipline when the bible says you are. Your assumptions have been just that, assumptions. Please give me the Bible.

The Bible says you are to get involved when you know of sin in the church. Your denials of this seem odd to me.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/7/2003 1:50 PM (GMT -6)

S.B.G.,

You said, "You seem also to presuppose that the church is in agreement that divorce is NEVER an option. I personally do not think this is the case. Sometimes it is inevitable, for instance:
If only one person wants to save the marriage. You can give a husband and wife all the advice and admonitions in the world, but if one person refuses it won’t do any good! Sometimes trust has been irreparably ruined, that is why Jesus says “except…”
If one partner is causing the other serious emotional or physical abuse, and sees no need to change or is unwilling to change, there is only so long the abused party can remain in the situation. “A crushed spirit, who can bear?”

Christians are not to divorce. That is clear in I Cor. 7. A christian married to an unbeliever is allowed to let the other divorce them. Paul says that if an unbeliever wants to leave - let them go. But the christian is not to divorce the unbeliever. They are to live peacably with them so as to win them over. Two non christian divorcing is non of the churches business. They are already judged.

S.B.G., You have a way of cutting off verses and not giving the whole context, like when you quote - except... Paul has no except in I Cor. 7 and Jesus except was only for sexual immorality "fornication" that took place during the betrothal period. Your "except" does not apply to the words you use it for.

A person can deal with one who has a crushed spirit buy putting their trust in Christ. By delighting in him and His soveregnty. This is where it is to be anyway.

The person who doesn't want to save the marraige is probably an unbeliever. That doesn't allow a believer to leave.

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/7/2003 2:03 PM (GMT -6)

S.B.G.,

You said, "Different people respond to different styles of persuasion; some would come running back if the church ostracized them in order to end the loneliness and shame. But most would run farther and farther away from the church (and even God) in search of unconditional love. But both actions would be reactionary, and most likely not healthy."

It is irrelavent how different people respond to styles or persuation. The Bible says to do it gently, but do it. Name the sin. Don't use soft terms like "I feel" or "we think". Tell them what the sin was or is. Give them the basis on what to repent. Don't say, Well you were devisive, or well, you didn't tell the truth. Tell them what they were devisive about and what they said that was not true. Give them the evidence. Don't say, We don't like what you said, Say this is what you said and this is why it is wrong and then give the evidence. Give them a chance to present their evidence to the contrary.

It is not up to us to determine what the best way is to deal with sin. God lays it out in the verses I have given you to read. It doesn't matter how someone choses to deal with the discipline they recieve. It matters that those who have been given the authority to discipline, discipline. God will harden or cause one to repent as he sees fit and that is between God and that other person. You are responcible to do what God has given you as a leader in the church to do. You will be held accountable for that.

By the way, where are you Bob? What happened to your posts?

Laika
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433

Posted 5/8/2003 2:34 AM (GMT -6)

Johnson asks:

quote:

By the way, where are you Bob? What happened to your posts?

Bob has been booted:

http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2004

Bobbie touched the third rail and I'm a little curious what it was.

"Horse's head found in a bed, broke the code and braved the weather"

Edited by - Laika on 05/08/2003 08:57:55 AM

johnson
Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 38

Posted 5/9/2003 2:05 PM (GMT -6)

Continued....

12. Husbands who divorce disobey God's command to love their wives. Ephesians 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. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

13. Divorce demonstrates wrong attitudes. I Corinthians 13:4-7
Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; [6] Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; [7] Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

14. The second greatest commandment in the law is violated by Divorce. Matthew 22:39
And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

15. Divorce makes a liar of the one who claims to love God. 1 John 4:20
If anyone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.

15. Wives who divorce violate god's command to reverence their husbands.Ephes. 5:22
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

16. Divorce abandons confidence that God is big enough to handle this difficulty. 2 Cor. 9:8
And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work.

17. Divorce difiles the picture that marriage is intended to portray of Christ's loving relationship with the church. Ephes. 5:24
Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Ephes. 5:32-33
This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. [33] However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

To be continued....

92 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:58 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual