SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : General Topics : Divorce and Remarriage

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Ron Bailey part three

Dear Ronnie,
thank you for the kind discrete response...lol

My main drift was towards an imparted virginity on much the same as the circumcision of the heart that is referenced in Jeremiah.

me and the lads are headed for ball game at Dodgers stadium......brother, you simply must, must I say, take in a game of professional American baseball someday.

baseball is what we once were, football is what we've become.

May the Lord bless you as I remain your humble servant in Christ, Neil

 2005/9/9 19:41









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

Quote:
My own view on this is that the narrow interpretation of Matthew's reference to fornication as meaning 'pre-marital sex' just cannot be sustained from the Bible data.

But
Quote:
One of the things we 21st Century christians need to think through is the implications of all this. Is a common-law marriage between two faithful partners less 'valid' that a legal marriage in Las Vegas that lasts for an hour or two? [b]Can someone live a life of promiscuity but still be regarded as 'unmarried' and therefore eligible for '[i]Christian[/i] Marriage'[/b]?

Not wishing to make light of this, but, are you suggesting we are not taking premarital sex seriously enough, and perhaps there should be some responsibility on the promiscuous person, to make a commitment to his first sexual partner? If not the first, how would he choose?

Quote:
This means we must be very cautious about the way we use the Old Testament to understand the New Testament. [b]The New Covenant contains a promise of a new-heart[/b], so is there now any accommodation for 'hardness of heart' in the Church? are we back to 'as it was in the beginning?'.

In the Matthew verses, the weight is on the man. He must not put his wife away for 'hardness of heart'. In the new (soft) heart scenario then, we are particularly talking about the saved partner being the male? Because if the wife has a new heart, she is entreated not to [i]leave[/i] her husband - which can be a tricky one.... (1 Cor 7:13) while he still has a 'hard' heart.

Also, is this a similar point to the suggestion that marriage is less dissovable than we might wish?

 2005/9/9 21:31









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

Quote:
"A former pastor I know lost his position in a Christian organization when his wife left him and married another man. She admitted that he had been a good husband and father, but said his income level had been too low. He now is not permitted to serve as an elder because he is viewed as not meeting the "husband of one wife" requirement of 1 Timothy 3:2. This man, an innocent victim of his wife's greed, had been dealt with far more severely than many pastors who repented after immorality.

This troubles me. [b]A man thus divorced still meets the "husband of one wife" qualification, even after a new marriage. The Greek expression is literally "a one-woman man."[/b] This refers to a man whose life as a husband was marked by fidelity to his mate. A good husband who remarries after his wife dies is also a "one-woman man" in spite of having a second wife.

[url=http://www.gospelcom.net/rbc/ds/q0806/q0806.html]http://www.gospelcom.net/rbc/ds/q0806/q0806.html[/url]

Am wondering whether the divorced partner (whose previous spouse has now remarried) [i]does have[/i] a permission to marry again if he desires?

dorcas said
Quote:
there are spiritual implications for those who fornicate or commit adultery, or commit homosexuality, all of which are relevant to 'but ye are washed, ye are sanctified' in 1 Cor 6:9 - 11. [b]Do you see what I mean?[/b] [u]Regeneration changes these 'relationships[/u]'.....

Isn't it possible for the sexual behaviour in a [i]marriage[/i], also, to need to be brought under this 'washed' and 'sactified' influence? And isn't this one of the reasons some 'marriages' do not 'stand' the strain of one partner being born again?

 2005/9/9 21:43
ZIONSLAVE
Member



Joined: 2003/11/29
Posts: 20
Orlando, Florida

 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

Quote:
Until the church from pulpit to pew repents of this matter, the church is and will continue to be powerless in winning the lost. Racked with its own adultery and fornication, it has the nerve to hypocritically point the finger at homosexuals and their lifestyle – while preachers and pastors remain silent on divorce and remarriage. Homosexuals make up about 5% of the population but have more of an impact on society than the church does.



The Bible calls homosexuality an abomination. The Bible does not use the same harsh words against remarriage. What is the "percentage" of those remarried that did it as a result of infidelity on the part of thier spouse? The quote above is just a small portion of a post riddled with folly. The church will never be powerless to be a tool to win the lost. Also the use of the word hypocrite to describe the preaching of Gods men against homosexuality actually puts the poster in danger. There will always be sin. The presence of sin is not a reason to stop preaching on this subject or that.

Quote:
The Religious Right is nearly half-full with people living in continuous adulterous lifestyles, and those who are not remarried fully accept their remarried brothers and sisters without question. They even perform their adulterous marriage ceremonies in their churches. Yet they have the gall to preach from their pulpits or shout through the airwaves that God wants us to stop the world from accepting homosexuals the same way they have been accepted by God.



Homosexuals have not been accepted by God. God accepts only spotless redeemed. You will see no homosexuals or adulterers in heaven.

Quote:
Why do they pick on one “sinful” lifestyle but not their own? Why homosexuality and not adultery?



If your church doesnt preach against adultery you should change churches.Lets be careful not to condone or defend sinful lifestyle period. We are called to be perfect. Pitting one set of sins against another is not useful.

I guess one thing that upsets me about the original post is that its filled with opinion. I know opinions are like armpits. Everyones got them and at one time or another they stink. There is an underlying defense of a homosexual in the original posters writing. Maybe a friend or relative that has recieved serious condemnation for homosexuality? I understand a sentiment to want love to be shown to all men regardless of thier sin. We just need to be careful not to cause confusion.


_________________
tommy

 2005/9/9 23:52Profile









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

philologos said

Quote:
Regeneration does not alter our sexual relationships. [b]I am not taking the side here of either in this discussion[/b]. I have been pastoring and counseling people with marital and sexual struggles for almost 50 years; [b]I am bruised with the bruisings that people have suffered in this area. Bruises which are the result of absolute positions being taken[/b]. I could tell you stories that would make your hair curl.

Want to acknowledge this, and not wishing you should be any more bruised on my account, but am intending still to respond to the song you posted.

 2005/9/10 0:04
ZIONSLAVE
Member



Joined: 2003/11/29
Posts: 20
Orlando, Florida

 Re:

I guess all in all the thing I disagree with most about the original post is this statement.

Quote:
This Quote from homosexual activist Elroy McKinley is defiantly worth reading, contemplation and discussion.



Where is the original poster anyway? :-o


_________________
tommy

 2005/9/10 0:23Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re: Ron Bailey part three

Quote:
me and the lads are headed for ball game at Dodgers stadium......brother, you simply must, must I say, take in a game of professional American baseball someday.


Baseball? Did you never get to play cricket while you were over here? Some unbelievers have called in 'baseball on valium'! What does it tell you about a culture that can invent a game that goes on for 5 days and can still end in a draw?

There is a theory that the English, being a godless race, invented cricket to give themselves some idea of eternity. (just joking)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/9/10 3:34Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Homosexuals have not been accepted by God. God accepts only spotless redeemed. You will see no homosexuals or adulterers in heaven.


This statement contains the seeds of 'justification by sanctification' and as such needs to be addressed. I know what you are saying; that we cannot remain in our sins. But it is vital to understand that 'God justifies the ungodly' not the godly. He came to call 'sinners to repentance' not the righteous. We must not put any condition on God's 'acceptance' of men and women other than the death of his Son.

After we have been accepted... well that is a different story but at the moment of acceptance the old gospel hymn got it right...
"sing it o'er and o'er again
Christ receiveth sinful men"
“And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.” (Luke 15:2, KJVS)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/9/10 3:44Profile
ZIONSLAVE
Member



Joined: 2003/11/29
Posts: 20
Orlando, Florida

 Re:

I do not retract my statement. It is 100% valid and backed by scripture.

My statement must have been confused in the interpretation. I am sorry I was not more clear in my communication. I know that the Lord accepts all who come to him in true repentance. The statement maybe should read...

Only those who are repenting of thier homosexuality (and other sin) will be recieved by God. God only accepts those who have been redeemed through His Sons blood. You will see no homosexuals or adulteres in heaven.

You see we come to God as we are but not as we were. You cannot regard sin in your heart and recieve salvation. If you go to the alter knowing you are going to continue in sin, not willing to turn from it, and ask for God to forgive you and redeem you he will not.

Psa 66:18 If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear [me]:

Christ accepts those who are willing to give thier sin and lives to Him, those who step out in faith turning from thier sin to Christs perfect path. People sin after salvation. But the Lord doesnt accept sin into heaven.

Rev 21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Jah accepts those who have been purified by total repentance and acceptance of the Sacrifice of Christ. So really once you become a christian you are no longer an adulterer or a homosexual.


_________________
tommy

 2005/9/10 14:41Profile









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage - re Michael Card song

Hi philologos,

This is long. It seems the only way to share what I believe is further relevant information. I've tried to focus on what I [i]need[/i] to communicate clearly in this context, but, inevitably, other facts are excluded, for brevity and simplicity. (This is not an attempt to make me look better than I was. :-()

Quote:
In that phrase

(v 5 But our wounds are part of who we are?
And there is nothing left to chance?
And pain's the pen that writes the songs?
That call us forth to dance.)

he has caught part of the mystery of evil permitted by a good God. [b]We need to tell the 'abused' that they have not been contaminated by what has happened, and that they are not quilty[/b]. But let's not tell them that we can re-write history. God will waste nothing, not even the abuses that we have suffered.

I now can agree the abused is not [u]responsible[/u], but whether a victim [i]sinned[/i] or not, is on a sliding scale of what was involved in their abuse and whether they can live with what they did actually ‘do’, without feeling the need to repent. The over-simple premise of 'perpetrator responsibility' does not take into account the many ways an abuser can ‘dump’ [u]guilt[/u] on a victim.

I carried a heavy burden of [i]false[/i] guilt from one abuser (later in my childhood), for 30 years, which had been obscuring the more important distortions set earlier. Not until the false guilt was removed, could anything else surface for attention.

When a person as damaged as this, attempts to join in marriage union with another person who is equally damaged, I hope you can see [b]disaster[/b] written in capital letters all over the venture.

'But let's not tell them that we can re-write history.'

Thank you for posting the beautiful song. Your thoughtfulness touched me deeply.

Quote:
v 1 [b]My father was a doctor
Who would come home late at night
With a soul so bruised and bleeding
From his unending, faithful fight[/b]

My father too, was a doctor, who held out hope of 'healing' to 'his hurting humankind'. But, he was the unsuspecting parent, whom I adored and on whom I tried to model myself. He had no idea about the abuse. The abuser was my mother mainly, (and she did not protect me from other abusers). She was a doctor too, and a ‘daughter of the manse’. These two last pieces of information seemed to make her calculated actions all the more a betrayal, when I remembered how they had been played on as regular substantiation of her [good] character.

Still unconscious of all this, I did what the statistics tell - the majority of survivors of sexual abuse marry someone just like their most influential abuser. Hence the reference to Sodom. The amazingly similar details of her early life, to that of my ex husband, did not really dawn on me until I made this connection – that she had abused her daughter and he had abused his son. As it happens, I only had sisters, but, she also abused her nephew. Likewise, my ex also abused his daughter. I know some sex offenders have no problem being one flesh with their legal spouse, but, it would be an understatement to say anything but the opposite pertained in my experience.

It really was a double-bind sort of situation in both directions because of the unscrupulousness of the cult leader who encouraged and facilitated the ‘marriage’. I was desperate to marry - because of my past. The person I married, was desperate not to marry - because of his past.

I found out after I’d left the marriage, the ‘cult leader’ had known of my ex's sex offending history. (Just to add context to this, the same cult leader put a different sex offender in charge of children’s work for a while. Ten’s of children from non-Christian families were affected before the youth worker eventually served a prison sentence.)

I take your point completely that ‘pain’ finds its way into our lives effortlessly. I left my marriage with far more wrong with me than I’d had when it began. Still, the way the Lord has revealed Himself to me [i]because[/i] of ‘the pain’, has not included my having to [i]keep[/i] the pain. In a way, I will never be able to compute the differences I still carry, but largely, I am not in pain any more.

My first experience of dramatic healing was in a church service where healing was not being preached. The texts were Psalm 23 v 1 and Jeremiah 1. Verses 6 – 10 particularly spoke to me.

6 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child. 7 But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. 8 Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD. 9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. 10 See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.

In verse 10, there are 4 destroying verbs ‘root out’, ‘pull down’, ‘destroy’ and ‘throw down’ to be employed before ‘build’ and ‘plant’, which encouraged me to believe God really intended to undo what had been done to me. As I sat there simply responding in my spirit, He unexpectedly (by me) reached into my depths, and laid a hot poultice on a specific place within, where I was able to discern Him healing a very old putrefaction, indurated with a particular type of unhealed inflammation which had been there for ever, (it seemed). I almost gasped at the initial pain He revealed, but the healing quickly made it bearable and within a few (long) seconds, I was changed.

That single event taught me something about what was possible, if I was willing to invite Him [i]consciously[/i] to do something like it again. Later, I discovered I could ask Him to heal what He knew should be the next thing, and merely open myself to Him without fear of being hurt or hurried or losing control of the process. Slow as this might have been, in fact, it was comparatively painless. I found He could heal parts of me which were numb with bearing old injury, bringing them straight into life, without having to bear the agonising process of un-numbing. For a survivor, this can be fraught with flashbacks and emotional turmoil, nightmares and physical distress. The Lord preserved me from all but innuendos of this potential devastation – and that was quite enough to comprehend. Each traumatic event leaves a trace or wound. Sometimes, months can be spent bringing just one such to the Lord. Other times, if the pattern of abuse was consistent enough, whole years can be rolled into a single, effective prayer, which deals with a whole aspect of it forever, completely.

Getting back to marriage… maybe I was married and just didn’t appreciate it but I certainly have to own up to bringing an intensely preoccupied mind and body to the attempt. Again, after leaving the ‘marriage’, I learned that my ‘spouse’ had returned to sex offending while I was expecting my first child. In fact, as [i]soon[/i] as I left my ‘marriage’, he started owning up to an extensive history of untreated mental health issues, and it was not long before he was skilfully unpicked by an experienced social worker, who persuaded him to be formally assessed by a forensic department.

My naivete combined with my dogmatism created unique problems as ‘the system’ desperately tried to protect the children, until, mainly to arrange child support and gain access to the marital home, I had no choice but to divorce. It was satisfying (though stressful) to manage to sort out ‘our’ debts during that period, while I still supported him from a distance. I don’t doubt, had there been no children, we could have gone on as we were, with my knowing nothing about his other life, (Actually, that’s not quite true. He tried to tell me latterly, but, I didn’t really understand – tho’ I did know I wasn’t prepared to co-operate.) but, I really hope you’re going to tell me it was ok to leave him.

His denial of having abused our children, (while owning up to abusing outside the family), is really not sustainable in the face of evidence. I chose to protect my children from court. This protected my ex from embarrassment. In fact, I did not have the strength to face what would have been involved, largely because of my own survivor status. Also because of this, I was still trying to make sense of what I knew, as late as last year. [i]And[/i], one [u]doesn't tell[/u] abused children what happened to them, as it interferes with their recovery.

There is a sense in which history cannot be undone, but, I think that may be more of an outsider's objective view. From [u]in[/u]side my head, [u]history [i]has[/i] been re-written[/u]. Nowadays, I'd include my marriage in that, too.

 2005/9/11 0:36





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy