SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : News and Current Events : Hal Lindsey's on wife #4

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Matt.5:31-32:

Matt.5:31-32; "Furthermore it has been said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.' 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery."

Can you explain why Joseph wanted to divorce Mary BEFORE they were married?

Luke 2:3-6 "And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered."

Matt. 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 (divorce) privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."

 2014/11/26 11:58
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2094
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
For those who are putting all their chips on Matthew 19:9, do not forget about Mark 10:10-12 and Luke 16:18. The only difference between these 3 accounts is the loophole and I say this from experience because I searched high and low for a way out of my marriage.

I do not say this lightly or carelessly, this is of the utmost seriousness.


Again, Matt.5:31-32 is also a passage we cannot overlook, as well as 1Cor.7:15. Someone had stated that there was only one verse that seemed to allow permission for divorce in case of fornication, namely Matt.19:9, and that we can possibly apply a principle of "majority rules" and only heed the passages in Mark and Luke. Again, we must be careful not to interpret God's Word like that because all Scripture is vital, it's still God's Word.
Quote:
And if you have such an assurance that YOUR conditions are right, you will take them before God and give an account one day.


On the other hand, if the interpretation that forbids divorce and remarriage even in the cases of fornication and desertion is a wrong interpretation, many will be held accountable for placing restrictions on people that are not taught in God's Word.

At the end of the day I think there are good arguments on both sides.


_________________
Oracio

 2014/11/26 12:11Profile
rbanks
Member



Joined: 2008/6/19
Posts: 1262


 Re: Matt.5:31-32:

Romans 4:6-8 (KJV)
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Acts 2:29-31 (KJV)
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.


Both Paul and Peter mentions David in very high regards concerning the new covenant. Peter under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit says that David was a prophet.

I also very much agree that under the new covenant we should experience the grace of God that causes us to live a higher standard of righteousness than under the old covenant. Sin is not to have dominion over us because we our not under the Law but under Grace.

What I was saying in my earlier post, is that, we must not condemn others for their past sins because the blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to cover and to cleanse us from all sin never to be remembered again, so we should not bring up peoples past sins to condemn them.

We all have past sins even the Apostle Paul whom said that he was the chief of sinners in magnifying also the mercy and grace of God.

I do believe as the Apostles brought out in Timothy and Titus that their is a higher standard for those who proclaim the gospel. We also must realize that we are also to magnify God's mercy and grace in his forgiveness to others in reconciling them to himself. We must also proclaim that their sins and iniquities he will remember them no more.

Hebrews 10:16-19 (KJV)
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

I have come to an understanding that God hates all sin and wants so much to forgive us and to cleanse us completely to where we sin no more.

I also know that the bible does not teach that adultery is a higher sin than murder. Some are very legalistic over "adultery" than they are "murder" not understanding what they are even doing. Jesus even took murder to the level of hating someone in your heart.

Let me give you an example, we all should know that bible teaches that Jesus shed his blood to forgive all sin to the point that God does not hold it against us nor remember it anymore when we repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

We all know that when someone is killed that we can't bring that person back neither can we undo what we have done but God's mercy and grace is sufficient when we confess and repent. We are no longer to walk around in guilt for the rest of our days. Not so to some over adultery, they want the adultery to feel guilty the rest of their life unless they get another divorce and remain single, even when there is no chance of reconciling their former marriage.

They want to go on accusing them of continually living in adultery. I realize that restitution and reconciliation should be made where it is possible to do so, but when it isn't or didn't happen why can't some believe that God can forgive this also and bless the person to live for him. When we can't forgive others of adultery we show no mercy and are self righteous in heart. We must show mercy to others if we want mercy shown to us!

We all need his mercy!

 2014/11/26 12:23Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2094
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
Moses permitted Divorce because in Old Covenant men had a hard heart that had no compassion. So he gave them permission to divorce. But even in that case of heard heart, it should be coupled with adultery to divorce legally.


Actually, in the case of adultery capital punishment was commanded under Moses(Deut.22:23-24; Lev.20:10). The permission given in Deut.24:1 was for "some uncleanness", which again could not mean physical adultery. I also don't believe it was restricted to finding out about a lack of virginity during the time of engagement. But it had to be something seriously considerable. There were different interpretations among the Jews as to what kinds of "uncleanness" would qualify. During Christ's time it had gotten to a point where men where divorcing their wives for any reason they came up with. Jesus says in essence, "No, only on account of fornication(sexual sin) do I permit for you to put away you wives."


_________________
Oracio

 2014/11/26 13:13Profile
MrBillPro
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3326
Texas

 Re:

Sometimes I feel to totally understand God, we would have to be God.


_________________
Bill

 2014/11/26 13:35Profile









 Re: Matt.5:31-32:

tuc, in Jewish tradition, they (Mary and Joseph) were married (they signed a covenant), they just didn't have the official public ceremony yet.

For more info: http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/jewish_marriage_customs.htm

Or something more creditable: http://goo.gl/F3udZJ

A quote to support my statement: "At the betrothal the woman was legally married, although she still remained in her father's house. She could not belong to another man unless she was divorced from her betrothed."

 2014/11/26 14:12
savannah
Member



Joined: 2008/10/30
Posts: 2091


 Re: Kenneth Copeland on wife #3


Wife #1 - Ivy Sandra Bodiford Copeland.

Kenneth was 20 years old at the time of their daughter Terri Lin's birth.

Ivy Sandra Copeland was the one of the two who filed for divorce; which is revealed by the fact that she is shown as the “plaintiff” of record in the court document. She was granted the divorce (to include child support) on March 18, 1958.

The civil docket records within a handwritten note,:

Both parties were present at trial. Divorce granted – custody of child to her – he has right to visit. He is ordered to pay $15 each Friday beginning this Friday. Defendant…” referring to Kenneth, “… gave notice of appeal. She is awarded ½ interest in income from contract on all recordings she has made to date under Leonard Contract.

Three years later, court documents show that Kenneth was found in contempt of court on March 31, 1961 for failing to consistently pay his required $15 per week child support to Ivy for Terri. He was in arrears for $1,090.00 (just over 72 weeks worth of support).

Wife #2 - Cynthia Ann Copeland

November 2, 1961, Kenneth and his second wife, Cynthia Ann Copeland, were granted a divorce.

This court document indicates that Kenneth was the “plaintiff” which means that he was the one who filed for divorce this time. However, it also calls Cynthia Ann the “cross-plaintiff” therein, which indicates that she was also wanting to end the marriage for some reason. Thus, it seems that their divorce was a mutual decision, though Kenneth is the party who originally filed. There were no children.

Wife #3 - Gloria Jean Copeland

Only five months after his second divorce was finalized, Kenneth and Gloria were married on April 13, 1962.
He was 25 years old at the time, and she had just turned 20 that February before.

In the light of Kenneth having been married and divorced twice already, his sudden marriage proposal on his very first date with Gloria seems impulsive.

Kellie Dee Copeland - Ward - Kutz - Swisher was born February 9, 1964 to Kenneth and Gloria.

Kellie’s first marriage was to Doyle Blaine Ward on September 18 1982, according to Texas state records. The two had two daughters, Rachel and Lindsey. They were divorced, but the date and conditions thereof are not clear.

Kellie’s second marriage was to Alan Win Kutz, Jr. on November 7, 1985. They had two children together, Jenny and Max.

Win and Kellie were divorced February 10, 2005.

Kellie was remarried for the third time to Stephen Lowell Swisher on July 18, 2008.

In 2011 the title of a week-long series of programs taught by Kellie was The Love of God and His Good Plan for You. The product offering for that series of broadcasts was KCM’s “Power of Love Package,” which includes the teaching series, “Building Relationships that Last.”

Why would she or anyone think she'd be remotely qualified to teach on that subject.

This second-generation televangelist daughter of Kenneth Copeland (by his third wife, Gloria) seems to be following in her dad's footsteps in more ways than one. Now on her third marriage herself, Kellie Copeland (Ward, Kutz) Swisher is continuing in her ministry with third husband Stephen Lowell Swisher.

WHY THIS THREAD - CONSIDER...

1 Tim 3:1,2,7 from two translations;

Faithful is the saying, "If any one is eager to have the oversight of a Church, he desires a noble work." A minister then must be a man of irreproachable character, true to his one wife, temperate, sober-minded, well-behaved, hospitable to strangers, and with a gift for teaching; It is needful also that he bear a good character with people outside the Church, lest he fall into reproach or a snare of the Devil.

It is a faithful saying, that if a man desireth the eldership, he desireth a good work.And an elder ought to be such, that no blame can be found in him; and he should be the husband of one wife, with a vigilant mind, and sober and regular [in his habits], and affectionate to strangers, and instructive;And there ought to be good testimony of him from those without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of Satan.

 2014/11/26 22:11Profile
back-to-acts
Member



Joined: 2011/5/12
Posts: 28
Texas

 Re:

You know a big issue I see is the fact that all of these ministers mentioned have to " live up" to this unstoppable, got it all together persona that is required from congregations now in days. What if one of these men got up a Sunday morning and said " I have struggled this week with lustful thoughts and God has shown me that a lot of flesh still remains in me. I would rejoice if ONE big name minister was just honest the way Paul was when he confessed all the fear and depression he experienced during his journeys- 1 Cor 2 , 2 Cor 7:5-6 . But you know why they can't? Because the show must go on!! No delays in the presentation , no flaws , no intense brokenness. Our little consumer sheep need their entertainment. They need something to consume and they only consume pretty put together pastors. I'm not talking about being explicit about our struggles, but how shocked we would all be if a pastor got up and was just real! We say it's all about love! Let me ask you this then, how much love would have for your pastor who looks at your wife would lust? It's a total cop out to say I love you, when you don't even know that person. You may love them for being a human being, but get to know them and then test you capacity to love. Should pastors be struggling with lust or any type of sin? NO! But nether should any of us! We are to be holy the way God is holy. And my God doesn't struggle with lust. But there are steps men need to take at times and having to put on show all the time to keep there position and there salary coming in is not going to help. I believe in public confession of struggles , not explicit , but nothing hidden. For the sake of my sanctification and for the sake of testimony to others who need to hear or who are in the same situation. Will that get me to a place of some big name church on stage? Nope! But will it make me more and more like Jesus? I believe so.

Travis


_________________
Travis Cunningham

 2014/11/27 12:41Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2094
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

God's Word clearly lays out certain qualifications for being a pastor as well as a deacon in a church (see 1Tim.3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9).


_________________
Oracio

 2014/11/27 12:54Profile
back-to-acts
Member



Joined: 2011/5/12
Posts: 28
Texas

 Re:

Oracio, I completely agree and I'm not making excuses for sin in pastors. Those are qualifications for a mature Christian as well. I guarantee you if you took away pastors salaries , you would see more honesty in the pulpit and a lot less " falling" that takes place in the pastorate like discussed with these men being mentioned. On a side note, those qualifications are not the totality of qualifications for children of God or pastors. Perfection and holiness is. Now if there is complete sin that continues to happen like pornography , even if it's confessed those men need to step away for a while to get stuff figured out. It doesn't nullify there calling , but if a pastor has a continual issue going on that he may even confess , he has no business leading sheep at that moment. But honestly and truth has fallen in the pulpits that's for sure.


_________________
Travis Cunningham

 2014/11/27 13:32Profile





©2002-2021 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy