| Re:self-righteous supposing|
You know, sometimes things need to be restated...
From this perspective, we can honestly say our land is being made wicked by the very church who should be preserving righteousness
Some more little winged birds that can never be completely reeled back in...
I thought about quietly editing my statement below, but then I thought maybe there is some benifit in being more open. It seems Carter Conlon's concern over "Angry Watchmen" hits closer to me then I suspected.
Whether I spoke from poor logic, or by ungodly frustration, I should not have made that comment. The Church isn't making anything wicked...
Too often I find my frustrations are expressions of personal offenses more then Godly burdens. This fitful indulgence is unhelpful to those who might indeed be rediscovering the grace and rest of God.
I've been spoiled by a cheerful and long-suffering wife. Because of this, when it comes to clucking my tongue over divorce, I supposed I considered myself exempt from Paul's warning: But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?
'Such things' includes more then the one thing I happen to be pleased with myself over...whatever my sin and corrupt fruit has been it is surely equal to be counted among 'such things'.
If there is any encouragement in Christ in me, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, then let me heartily offer my prayers, my fellowship, my deep sympathies, and my humility, to those who may be hurting right now in some aspect from divorce. I gladly receive this same grace. O, there is more forgiveness and more hope in Christ then I was representing. May the love of Jesus overflow into your heart this night.
| 2007/11/8 20:26||Profile|
First of all, looking back, I realize my purpose for posting what I did was not Christ-like. I feel quite strongly about this issue and apparently let that get in the way. It was not directed at anyone posting here but rather at the fellow who wrote this paper. I apologize if I've offended anyone.
I do though think that if we look at all passages pertaining to divorce and especially remarriage, it becomes quite clear that we should at the very least be erring on the side of rejecting it. I guess because it seems so cut and dry to me, I wonder if this fellow has a hidden agenda, needing to use a large paper to argue in favor of divorce. I hope that clears things up. Chris
| 2007/11/8 23:56||Profile|
Instone-Brewer radically reinterprets the first passage using, of all things, quotation marks. The Greek of the New Testament didn't always contain them, and scholars agree that sometimes they must be added in to make sense of it.
I have just finished reading Instone-Brewer's book. It is a challenging viewpoint. I would recommend that folks read it before they reject it. It is 350 pages of carefull reasoning; it will be hard work for some but I would recommend reading it.
[url=http://www.amazon.com/Divorce-Remarriage-Bible-Literary-Context/dp/0802849431/ref=sr_11_1/105-0342729-3886825?ie=UTF8&qid=1194542812&sr=11-1]Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible; the Social and Literary Context.[/url]
One of the difficulties, sometimes, in understanding the scriptures is trying to work out the question that was being answered. This is particularly so in 1st Corinthians. This book tries to understand the social context of the key scriptural passages. His thesis is that we cannot understand the scriptural comments without the cultural context. He certainly explains the cultural context well. I think this is an honest book written by a man of integrity. He has been a 'research fellow at Tyndale House in Cambridge, England'.
Does he discuss the definition of fornication in this book with any scripture references? It seems to me if this is the only cause for divorce than it deserves looking into.
My question is this, was Isreal betrothed or married to God in this verse:
2 Chronicles 21:11
Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication, and compelled Judah thereto.
It looks like an interesting book.
| 2007/11/9 0:23|
Kansas City, Missouri
It is ironic that today we see the same thing going on in the Episcopal church......same actions of separation, different sin. Then it was adultery (remarriage), now it is homosexuality.
And I think it to be an honest observation. And in my opinion the homosexual agenda is Gods judgment against a Church that has approved of heterosexual sin. The issues facing the Episcopal Church rest assured will be coming to a Church near you if it has not already.
I look forward to buying the book.
| 2007/11/9 4:35||Profile|
| Re: TIME Magazine: "An Evangelical Rethink of Divorce?"|
Quote:I believe the more radical issue is idolatry, which the basis of sexual sins in [i]all[/i] their forms.
in my opinion the homosexual agenda is Gods judgment against a Church that has approved of heterosexual sin.
| 2007/11/9 11:27|
I believe the more radical issue is idolatry, which the basis of sexual sins in all their forms.
And not only sexual sins! Isn't idolatry, worshipping and serving the creature more than the Creator, pretty much the whole ball of wax? The old man is homo idolatrous.
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents. without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful...
| 2007/11/9 15:25||Profile|
You know, I was walking to my car thismorning and thought of this thread again... and I was thinking about the excuse that these people make using 'context.' That the verses in the bible were made in a 1st century context... but then they never go on to explain what that context is.
But then I remembered reading in a sociology book what one of the major problems was in the decline of the Roman empire: Divorce.
Even in 1st century Rome there was divorce, it was rampant, and it was a sin that the early church recognized. If there was any context besides infidelity that was permisable for divorce, they surely would have mentioned it in scripture.
What we've done is excuse ourselves to ignore the Word of God. We all know it is wrong, but for the sake of filling up pews and not hurting people's feelings we do not preach against sin!
We've let Satan build a stronghold within many of our churches, and he continues to take ground. There must be a counter-offensive, we must pray!
| 2007/11/9 15:31||Profile|
| Re: TIME Magazine: "An Evangelical Rethink of Divorce?"|
These are sad times in America, indeed. Our "section" of Christ's Body is becoming a weak, sickly, unfruitful branch that is in real danger of being cut off instead being pruned (purged) by our Father, the master gardener. May God have mercy on our present blindness and apathy! Why is it if we read a hundred theological discourses, hear a hundred sermons, or read a thousand secular opinions when it comes to marriage, divorce, and family issues what is heard is more agreement than the different views the above mentioned sources should have.
Why do those who profess to know God through Christ, claiming to have God the Spirit dwelling in them now are more concerned about searching the scriptures to find excuses for our disobedience and lack of faith...as opposed to diligently searching the Word to learn of Him, to be transformed in our being to reflect His glory in this dark world?
We are to be a people that want to rightly divide (skilfully handle) the Word of Truth. The heart of Jesus teaching was not about what sin or sins give us a right to divorce, but why God had to give His people the provision of divorce in the first place. It was not about what was done to the hurt, offended, or wronged party, but about the hardness of heart and root of bitterness springing up in the inner man toward this person that the Master has declared that I am one with.
Please don't think I am judging any particular individual...I have been previously accused of that in another forum here...that was not the case then, and it isn't now. "Who am I to judge another man's servant, to his master he either stands or falls." No this is my heart cry to the Lord, and to my genuine brothers and sisters in Christ: lets stop looking for and making excuses that only smack of false religion, and not reality in Him.
I would never be an advocate for an unrepentant husband or wife abusing the Christ-likeness of their husband or wife. However, the one who offends is no less sinful than the unforgiving party. God has accountability for husband and wife, regardless of the performance or non-performance of their mate. No I'm not advocating bondage...the scriptures in Corinthians address that.
I'm simply saying that there must be reasons why God expects us to treat marriage as a holy covenant, not one to be casually entered into, and even more seriously considered before tha last resort of divorce is done.
May GOD grant that we return to honest seeking of GOD's face to determine what the will of the Lord is in our unique situation. Then have the grace and heart to be obedient and walk in the will of the LORD, and not walk in our hurt,
our emotions, or our own thoughts.
The LORD Bless You & Keep You All,
Harold Dixon, Jr.
| 2007/11/10 13:34||Profile|
| Re: God forgives ALL sin, even divorce. Too bad Christians don't.|
I wasn't going to comment on this but all these sanctimonious comments have really grieved my heart. Who are we as mere humans to judge another's heart or better yet their calling? I will not condemn anyone who is divorced. God can only judge someones heart and understand what happened. The world is full of condemnation, why oh why is there so much of it in the church under the guise of quoting Scripture?
All I know and believe is that "gifts and the calling of God are WITHOUT repentance." (Rom 11.29)
I'd like for you all who so easily stand behind Scripture to condemn others to consider that if Christ is truly the Alpha and the Omega, please consider when He gave me (and others) the Holy Spirit and called us in our callings... that He knew our beginning, our erroneous middle, and that He knows our end. So if He truly is Alpha and Omega, then maybe truly He has more hope for us than you?
If He is anything like what I've read in your comments, all is lost with me (and others) but I thank God that I nor my calling is not lost or nor is my testimony. And yes, you're right, I'm divorced but I thank God that I only look to HIM for condemnation and since there is NONE in HIM, I can stand around folks like you.
Sadly, the majority will not even understand what I've written.
| 2007/11/10 20:46|
...I thank God that I only look to HIM for condemnation and since there is NONE in HIM, I can stand around folks like you.
Sister, there is merit in what you are expressing here.
I am sorry that some of our posts added to your grief. Let me ask for a little patience...many of the people here might not be expressing condemnation but their own grief over the dramatic increase of divorce within the Church. Certainly, whether we have personal experience with divorce or not, we have strong feelings in reaction to this trend,... but I do so desire to be careful, humble, and most of all Christlike, in how we treat those brethren who have been affected by it.
...the calling of God are WITHOUT repentance."
Sincerely, I appreciate you venturing to be heard on this. Some people, in a desire to stand strong, may dismiss and even resent those who have been wounded. In return, the wounded may understandably grow resentful towards them. Let's forgive one another just as easily as we once resented each other for the sake of that very same calling we share in Christ. Folks like us is all we have.
| 2007/11/10 21:34||Profile|