Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher?

Well, I'm sure you would agree that having more than one wife, rare that it might have been, was not completely unheard of. Bigamy was not a crime and therefore would occur from time to time.

 

Paul,

Agreed. The point is however, the context of 1 Tim 3. Verse two says, "An overseer (bishop), then, must be above reproach (blameless)." NASB (KJV). So let's turn these verses into a list:

Blameless
Husband of one wife
Temperate
Prudent
Respectable
Hospitable
Able to teach
Not addicted to wine
Pugnacious
Gentle
Peaceable
Free from the love of money
Manages his household well
Keeps his children under control (with dignity)

Verse five says, “but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?” All of these attributes of “blameless” point to the man’s character and fruits as evidence of successful spiritual leadership of his family. They all speak to the present “fruits” of the man! With that in mind, tell me which one of these fits better with the rest:

- A one-woman, devoted to his wife, man
- A man who has never been divorced

 

I find it interesting that there were no responses to the previous post.

 

Oh, I'm with you a hundred percent on the application of this issue. The man may have been divorced in the past or may not but his present marriage needs to show the fruits of a spiritual life and show the appropriate loving faithful relationship a marriage is supposed to have. Anything less and he is not a suitable candidate for the ministry.

 

Not in my church and personally I would never attend a church where a divorced man pastored. I sure don't think divorced people are second class I just think they disqualify themselves.

 

Would you submit to a man who committed manslaughter? What if 40 years ago he got drunk and ran off the road and killed his wife in a wreck?

What if he had been of another religion (say Moslem), his wife was converted to Christianity and he killed her. (Paul persecuted Christians) Then he had a miraculous salvation and served God for years, married a godly Christian woman, raised obedient, godly children and was called to preach? Would you submit to a pastor who 40 years ago killed his wife but not one who divorced her? After all, her death biblically "ended" the previous marriage.

Every qualification on the list in I Timothy 3 refers to how a man is behaving now and how he has behaved in the recent, observable past. It doesn't say, "having ALWAYS been blameless, having ALWAYS been sober, having ALWAYS been of good behaviour, having ALWAYS been given to hospitality, having ALWAYS been apt to teach, having ALWAYS been not given to wine", etc. but you and others add to the scripture and insert "having ALWAYS been" to the phrase, "the husband of one wife." You cannot ignore context when interpreting scripture

If Biblical divorce ends the marriage for anyone, (Jn 4:17,18) it ends the marriage for prospective elders too. I have ONLY ONE WIFE! (Jesus says, "Thou hast well said") No one on this earth hates divorce more than me. I wouldn't wish it on Osama Bin Laden. But the narrow, twisted interpretation of the phrase "husband of one wife" to mean "having NEVER been divorced" is not supported by one single scripture.

I know several men who lost their wives to divorce because they WERE ruling his own household. MANY women leave BECAUSE the man is living too holy. When a person gets ready to rebel, it's nobody's fault but their own.

Could God be your Pastor?

Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of Divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Lacy Evans

 

Wewll first of all I still say that means one living wife, not one at the time. When my parents divorced if my dad would have remarried he would have had 2 living wives. That is what I beleive and I beleive that God meant marriage to be one man/ one woman for one lifetime.

I know someone who had Godly parents and this lady married what she thought was a Godly man. After they were married and the had a small baby he committed adultrey and there marriage ended in divorce. That has been 10 years now and he has remarried but she doesn't feel like she has grounds to remarry. She has grounds for a divorce but not to remarry. Now you might ask is that fair and I will hve to say no it is not and she has had alot of lonely nights but God has so blessed her for doing right.

I hope I never face this kind of thing because I love married life but I also want to do what is right and I would want a man of God to be what the Bible says he should be to be a Pastor.

I hope all this makes sence because I sure went on and on enough

 

Lacy--Bad example, because both manslaughter and divorce are one-time sins and can be forgiven if repented of. The blamelessness of a bishop doubtless applies to his Christian life, not his pre-salvation life.

A pastor who divorced and is remarried is living in a continuous state of unrepentant adultery. If he would repent of that sin and be forgiven, he must forsake committing the adultery.

 

I fail to see where we disagree. I agree that bith sins can be repented of. That was my point. But a pastor or anybody else who is scripturally divorced (His wife fornicated or was unsaved and left him) is not living in adultry if remarried (I Cor 7:15), nor is he guilty of ANY sin if he was an innocent party in the divorce. Divorce is not a sin. Divorce "saving for the cause of fornication" is a sin. Matthew 19:8 says that it has been that way "From the beginning"!

The issue is, "Does God recognize divorce?" The overwhelming evidence of scripture is that he does in at least two situations. A woman who fornicates breaks the marriage covenant. In fact in the Old Testament she was to be stoned. (That would make things much more simple today but it wouldn't be very Christian)If in the eyes of God the marriage is ended (John 4:17,18) then the man now has NO wives. If he remarries he now has ONE wife!

The simple reading is "husband of one wife". It just means what it says.

In Christ, Lacy

 

Yes, but the fornication exception clause doesn't apply to us because we don't have the Jewish betrothal custom to which it applied. And if an unbeliever leaves the believer is to remain as though unmarried or be reconciled.

 

In Jewish custom, betrothal is not engagement. Betrothal is the peroid between the wedding and the establishment of a permanent residence together. Whether or not they've established a home, they're still husband and wife. A bill of divorcement has no bearing on whether or not the married couple had established a home together.

 

Biblically marriage is a covenant. When the covenant is broken, it ceases to exist. A husband and wife are no longer husband and wife when their covenant has been broken for biblical reasons (adultery and abandonment). A pastor should not be penalized if his wife broke the covenant.

 

Just a few verses and the reason I beleive that being a husband of one wife doesn't mean 1 wife at a time but one wife only.

Mark10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put assunder.

Mark10:11-12 And he saith unto them, whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
And if a woman shall put away her husband and be married to another, she committed adultrey.

Now this is Jesus talking and I beleive he still means one man and one woman for one lifetime...even if the woman leaves the husband he is still disqualified if they get a divorce.

 

The reference "What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put assunder" Is not a reference to "husband of one wife". It's a warning to men not to break the covenant of marriage. When one leaves another in adultery, they have broken the covenant, and as such, the covenant no longer exists.

Men and women break the covenant all the time, while God keeps the covenant. (for example, leaving a mariage because you "got bored" with your partner, or you were no onger "in love" with your partner). However, the marital covenant is biblically broken in cases of adultery or abandonment. When the covenant is biblically broken, God is no longer part of that covenant. In these cases, I see no biblical reason why a divorced pastor cannot continue on the pulpit. One might as well also say that a widowed man may not be pastor, or that a single man may not be pastor (since Paul was single, I'd doubt that's what he meant).

 

That is an interesting theory and I've heard it many times and seen it offered as "proof" on this board. If you can prove it, I would be interested. I am afraid that many who use this argument are arguing from personal bias and not from scripture. In reality it can't be proven without "going to the Greek". In my Bible the word "fornication" comes from the word (in the original English) "fornication" and it means, "fornication" (-Sex between two people who are not married to each other). Adultry is the second definition in Webster 1828. (Look it up)

There is absolutely No hint of betrothal in the context.

Why did no one answer my question, "Would you submit to a pastor who had once (Many years ago) killed a wife?" Does being a repentant wife-murderer disqualify one from the ministry? Where does it say that if it does? Does it show more control of his household if he killed her than if he just divorced her? Forgive my sarcasm. I'm just trying to make a point.

Two brothers grow up in a small West Texas town. They were both as wild as march hares, drinking, doing dope, fornicating, etc. In the process of their life of sin they begin to date two sisters. Both girls soon turn up pregnant. Brother number one splits the scene and isn't heard from for ten years. He never pays a dime of child support. He continues on in his sinful ways and never marries.. Brother number two feels convicted and marries his girlfriend. The marriage lasts about a year and ends in divorce. Fast forward. Both brothers have been saved for 10-15 years now, serving God in a mighty way and living holy. Both brothers have made ammends with the sisters and made it right with their children. But because both are married to different women they cannot mary the sisters. Brother number one (Who did the pregnant sister so dirty and continued in his fornication till salvation) only married once and IS qualified. Brother number two (Who at least had the decency to try to make an honest woman out of the sister) has been married twice and is NOT qualified.

Lacy Evans

 

That is an interesting theory and I've heard it many times and seen it offered as "proof" on this board. If you can prove it, I would be interested. I am afraid that many who use this argument are arguing from personal bias and not from scripture. In reality it can't be proven without "going to the Greek". In my Bible the word "fornication" comes from the word (in the original English) "fornication" and it means, "fornication" (-Sex between two people who are not married to each other). Adultry is the second definition in Webster 1828. (Look it up)

There is absolutely No hint of betrothal in the context. </font>[/QUOTE]Well I'm not one of them. I'm arguing from Scripture because my personal bias would not be to say that my parents lived in adultery for 25 years. My personal bias, living according to the flesh, would be to accept divorce and remarriage because it would please the flesh, especially if I ended up in an unhappy marriage or my wife left me.

Porneia means all kinds of sexual immorality when used in its broad sense; it means sex between two people who are both unmarried when used in its narrowest sense. Unless clear by context, porneia generally has its broader sense. When used in contradistinction to a more specific word such as moicheia (adultery), its range is restricted to its narrow sense. This is shown in the NT where fornication is listed alongside adultery, which would be redundant if fornication were being used in its broad sense.

As for the context, the betrothal custom is entirely within the Jewish context--which is why the so-called Matthean exception clauses are not included in the parallel passages in the other gospels. This is further corroborated by the ability of women to get a divorce in the parallel accounts, which was denied Jewish women under OT law and not included in the Matthean account.

As for "proving" this theory, neither it nor any of the competing theories interpreting the Matthean exceptions can be "proved," except perhaps beyond a reasonable doubt by a preponderance of the evidence. Obviously, I'm persuaded by the evidence that the reading that is not as easy on the flesh is correct: the one consistent with the Markan and Lucan parallels.

 

The issue of pastorship aside, it's intersting that so many are presuming that a divorced person who remarries is an adulterer.

Take my own example: My marriage ended when my wife left me to shack up with another man. Adultery biblically allowed me to get a divorce. But it turns out that it was my wife who sought to divorce me after living in adultery for over two years. So here I am, a divorced man, who was a Christian before my divorce and am one now. Several years pass, and lo, God had put before me a wonderful Christian woman. Now Paul says very clearly that being single is perfectly noble. However, he also says that if a man has sexual desires, it is better for him to marry. Well, I'm a man, and I have sexual, emotional, and covanental desires. I plan on marrying again in God's time. I have the biblical support directly from Paul. If I marry again, I won't be an adulterer. Why should it be different for a pastor?

 

The problem is when you remarry. The bible does say you have grounds to divorce when there is adultrey but there is never grounds to remarry unless your spouse dies. I know it doesn't seem fair but if you are a preacher then if your wife leaves you and you divorce then you should not remarry unless you are willing to step down.