"The Husband of One Wife?

[Jerry W. Ramming]

Can anyone explain when the tradition of defining "The husband of one wife' (1 Timothy 3:2) as never having been divorced began? Seems only Church fellowship over 50 years of age still try to adhere to that definition, while even the Southern Baptist Association says it's up to the individual Church to use the definition that they prefer.
Appreciate any clarification on this.

 

[Salty]

//// while even the Southern Baptist Association says it's up to the individual Church to use the...
.

Or do you mean Southern Baptist Convention

 

[rlvaughn]

I have never studied the history of this subject. I can say from experience from my early life (1960s) that almost all Baptists in our area held that it meant a pastor could not be divorced (or at least not divorced and remarried). Of course, it would have excluded polygamy as well. The change on this seemed to coincide with the growing prevalence of divorce in the churches. This might be explained two ways: (1) the growing prevalence of divorce caused churches to desire to compromise on the matter; or (2) the growing prevalence of divorce caused churches to study the topic and find out they were wrong. (No doubt, some combination of both could be possible.)

John Gill was a Baptist preacher in England who became a pastor in 1719 and died in 1771. I looked in his commentary on 1 Timothy 3:2 and found:

...that he should have but one wife at a time; so that this rule excludes all such persons from being elders, or pastors, or overseers of churches, that were "polygamists"; who had more wives than one at a time, or had divorced their wives, and not for adultery, and had married others. Now polygamy and divorces had very much obtained among the Jews; nor could the believing Jews be easily and at once brought off of them.

Not sure how representative Gill is of all Baptists in England in his day, but this at least trace the "no divorce" idea to 1746, when he published his Exposition of the Whole New Testament.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

I stand corrected... multi-tasking work related reports and posting personal questions one after the other is obviously not one of my strong points..
The Southern Baptist Convention, from what I understand, leaves the definition up to the individual church.
I've been digging into this subject for weeks now and it seems that other than "tradition", everybody seems to feel that the phrase has nothing to do with divorce. Guess it's the origin of it that I'm curious about.

 

[Salty]

... This might be explained two ways: (1) the growing prevalence of divorce caused churches to desire to compromise on the matter; or (2) the growing prevalence of divorce caused churches to study the topic and find out they were wrong. (No doubt, some combination of both could be possible.) ...

We might keep in mind that back in the day - a pastor may not have gotten a divorced, because of the negative connotations.
Thus a pastor may legally be married, but Spiritually divorced.

 

[Reynolds]

Can anyone explain when the tradition of defining "The husband of one wife' (1 Timothy 3:2) as never having been divorced began? Seems only Church fellowship over 50 years of age still try to adhere to that definition, while even the Southern Baptist Association says it's up to the individual Church to use the definition that they prefer.
Appreciate any clarification on this.

I agree with MacArthur on this. Verse 2 does not prohibit divorced men from serving but verse 4 prohibits most divorced men from serving.

 

[rlvaughn]

Salty, I think that would have been true "back in the day" whether one was a pastor or not. It generally was not acceptable by church or community standards. In doing genealogical work I have noticed several people in the census who I knew were separated or divorced who listed their marital status as widow or widowed. I think all this is encompassed in the societal change of attitude on the issue. I suspect that a consistent "no divorce" policy has a fairly long history in Baptist churches.

It's also interesting that even back then Baptists sometimes "looked the other way" when it was a preacher they really liked. There was a popular preacher here in the 1930s who I was shocked to find out left his family in North Carolina and moved to Texas. Don't exactly remember B. H. Carroll's story, but seems like when he went off to the Civil War his wife had their married annulled (I'll look it up later and see what I find).

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

Randy Alcorn wrote a piece for epm.org back in 2010 that really put it in perspective as well as anything I've come across so far....

"Do we believe “husband of one wife” means he must always, even as an unbeliever, have had no more than a total of one wife in his lifetime?


If so, then wouldn’t we need to also extend the same understanding to the other qualifications so they include his distant or pre-Christian past? Let’s test it, adding that same interpretive phrase to all the other qualifications, and see what it would mean. This would mean that any elder must:

Have always, even as an unbeliever, been above reproach. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, been sober-minded. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, been self-controlled. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, been respectable. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, been hospitable. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been a drunkard. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been violent or quarrelsome. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, not been a lover of money. 

Have always, even as an unbeliever, managed his household well.

This would make no sense. It requires the fruit of the indwelling Holy Spirit in pre-Christian people who by definition did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit. It also presents a pragmatic problem, since virtually no one would be elder qualified, due to past choices and lifestyles stemming from a radically different worldview and heart condition."

Funny how some subjects are not allowed to be brought up for discussion in some churches.....

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

As one gentleman put it; "I could have murdered my ex-wife, got a good lawyer and got off in 5 years, rededicate my life to Christ and eventually been eligible to become a deacon......"
Never thought of divorce as the ultimate sin....

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

I agree with MacArthur on this. Verse 2 does not prohibit divorced men from serving but verse 4 prohibits most divorced men from serving.

Most I've talked to pretty much say that divorce is a blanket condemnation....

 

[rlvaughn]

Randy Alcorn wrote a piece for epm.org back in 2010 that really put it in perspective as well as anything I've come across so far....

"Do we believe “husband of one wife” means he must always, even as an unbeliever, have had no more than a total of one wife in his lifetime?

If so, then wouldn’t we need to also extend the same understanding to the other qualifications so they include his distant or pre-Christian past? Let’s test it, adding that same interpretive phrase to all the other qualifications, and see what it would mean. This would mean that any elder must...

This is an interesting investigation of the topic of the relation of a divorce before salvation re the office of elders. In the same piece at epm.org, I wished Alcorn had addressed the similar phrase "Having been the wife of one man" in 1 Timothy 5:9. There is seems very unlikely to refer to polygamy, which was not usual for women even in societies where polygamy was common, and seems more likely to mean putting away her husband and marrying another (Cf. Mark 10:12). This may shed some light on the chapter 3 passage.

 

[Salty]

Most I've talked to pretty much say that divorce is a blanket condemnation....

AKA - The Scarlet Letter

 

[TCassidy]

The primary problem is that most people today, including most Christians, have a very low view of marriage.

God set the standard for divorce, limiting it to adultery. There is no other biblical reason for divorce so divorce for any other reason is not divorce in God's eyes so the couple is still married. If such a person remarries he is a polygamist and polygamy disqualifies a man from both the office of pastor and the office of deacon.

As to most people having a low view of marriage, God honors faithfulness. The ultimate illustration of faithfulness is the relationship of Christ to the church. Divorce for any reason other than adultery is a disqualifying sin because by casting aspersions on the sanctity of marriage, it, by implication, casts aspersions on the faithfulness of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

Marriage, by God's design, is One Man and One Woman for One Lifetime. Even divorce for adultery was not part of the original design, but was allowed because of the hardness of men's hearts. That hardness (and overwhelming pride) precluded the injured party from forgiving the erring spouse for their failure.

So, a man is disqualified from both the office of pastor and the office of deacon if he is divorced for any cause other than adultery and remarries. In that case he is no longer the husband of one wife. If he does not remarry he is disqualified because he no longer rules well his own house. (If he had been doing his job, and loving his wife as God commanded, she would have had every reason to remain faithful.)

This is one of the unfortunate areas where we are beginning to allow our cultural norms to override the bible. We don't want to be called "narrow minded" or "old fashioned." We want to be popular. We want to be liked. So it is unthinkable to take a stand where fully half the men in the congregation are disqualified for the two offices of pastor and deacon (because, in our modern culture where, instead of fixing the problem, we simply discard the marriage, resulting in a divorce rate of about 50% in the US).

 

[Reynolds]

As one gentleman put it; "I could have murdered my ex-wife, got a good lawyer and got off in 5 years, rededicate my life to Christ and eventually been eligible to become a deacon......"
Never thought of divorce as the ultimate sin....

I do not look at it in this sense as the "sin" of divorce. We are listing qualifications for leadership. If one can not manage their family and their marriage covenant, how well can they manage the affairs of a church? I also agree with you that time is important. Did he get married at 17, divorce at 19, and he is now 40? Did he get divorced last year? Makes a difference, well it does in my mind anyway.

 

[TCassidy]

As one gentleman put it; "I could have murdered my ex-wife, got a good lawyer and got off in 5 years, rededicate my life to Christ and eventually been eligible to become a deacon......"

So, you are saying that a willful murderer is "without reproach," "temperate," "sensible," "hospitable," "not violent," "but gentle," "not quarrelsome?"

And a deacon who murders his wife is, "reverent," "holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience." "blameless?"

It is amazing what absurdities we invent when trying to contradict the word of God.

 

[TCassidy]

Did he get married at 17, divorce at 19, and he is now 40? Did he get divorced last year? Makes a difference, well it does in my mind anyway.

Proverbs 6:32 He who commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding. He who does it destroys his own soul.
33 He will get wounds and dishonor. His reproach will not be wiped away.

If he returns to the office of pastor or deacon he brings that reproach to that office.

He, upon confession and repentance, can be restored to fellowship, but never to leadership. He has forever forfeited that privilege.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

We have a lady at our church who stayed married for 30+ years. Finally, the beatings got to the point that she thought the next one would kill her. To this day she has a permanent order of protection against him. By any standard, she is a Godly woman and is well loved by both our church and community. She has recently remarried to a good man.
Hers was not a case of unfaithfulness, more of self preservation............
What if a man is divorced before he has been saved?
Like divorce, there are a lot of things God highly frowns on, but...........

9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

It is amazing what absurdities we invent when trying to contradict the word of God.

In no way, shape or manner would I contradict God's word......
but I do question some of the absurdities or pharisees like pretensions to superior sanctity that is spouted more regular than it should by some outside of this board.

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree with MacArthur on this. Verse 2 does not prohibit divorced men from serving but verse 4 prohibits most divorced men from serving.

Think that in context it better fits the idea of the Christian leader has but one wife, and not several at the same time.

 

[TCassidy]

Hers was not a case of unfaithfulness, more of self preservation............

Why wasn't he in prison? That is what Law Enforcement, Courts, Orders of Protection, and prisons are for.

What if a man is divorced before he has been saved?

He is divorced.