Which is worse?

Ah, yes, but you never qualified them as your beliefs. You presented them as doctrine, and I challenged you to provide specific Scripture to support them. Had you said that it was your personal belief, I would not have said anything, not even to say that I vehemently disagreed with you.

God gave us everything we needed in the Bible. As a result, He has ensured that we would have His Word preserved. When discussing matters of Doctrine, we do not need anything to supplement His Holy Word. If you have any questions, ask Him. I can tell you firsthand that you will find the answer. That is one of the most beautiful promises in the Bible.

 

According to the Peshitta text (written in the ancient Aramaic language of Jesus) the issue is marrying an "undivorced" woman. He who marries one commits adultery. This entire issue regards a bill of divorcement. Women in the days of Jesus, and prior, were chattel property. A Jewish man could leave his wife if he didn't like her cooking. In many cases she was left without a proper bill of divorcement. This is what Jesus is addressing.

 

I would think it would be a package deal here -- either take all or none.
What kind of signal would that send to the kids?
Hey, kids, your parents aren't worthy to join our church, but you are.
No, I would not even consider joining a church that would differentiate between me, my wife, and my kids.

 

Well...first off, families do not join as familes in our church. What I mean by this is that everyone has to go through a new members class, each has to be baptized and each has to give a testimony.

Now...if the kids didn't meet all three criteria, then they wouldn't be able to join with the parents.

Secondly, it wouldn't be sending any message. Our voting is done by word of mouth, not by ballets or hands. So...if I refrained from voting when the parents went up for membership and voted when the children when up for membership, who would know if I did or didn't?

(Sorry it took so long to respond. Been out the last two days with a 1002.3 and 101.2 temperature)

 

Colossians 2:8 -- "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."
Is this a church, or a country club?

How many people have turned away from God because of traditions of men? That's exactly what has happened here. If I'm not good enough to join, then neither is my family. Seems very exclusionary to me.
Yes, it does send a BIG message. That the children should be ashamed of the parents because they aren't good enough to become members.
And to say it doesn't, because you didn't vote for or against these people, is a cop out. Put the blame on someone else, I didn't have anything to do with it!! I recall someone called Pilate who did the same thing.....

Matthew 12:30 -- "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."

BTW, if you didn't vote for the person, you did vote against them.

 

It seems to me that by some people's opinions, (or interpretation of scriptures) that some sin is unforgivable and to my knowledge, that is NOT scriptural. Sounds like once someone is divorced, they are "damaged goods" ...not to be used by anyone else. If you divorce, then heaven forbid if you would want to marry again. To expect someone to remain celebate all their life (and never remarry) because they were divorced (regardless of who was at fault) is not realistic.

The elitist churches out there (and I don't care what denomination we're talking about here) that only want couples and families who would qualify for poster people for the ultimate Christian are failing as far as getting anyone into church. All it takes is for some discrimination to creep in...oh my..so and so is divorced... Give me a break. Divorce is not a good thing, but it is ALSO not a good thing for someone to stay with a philanderer, an alcoholic, or an abuser if that person is unwilling to change. I've seen far too many women stay with jerks for fear of looking bad or fearing that there is nothing better for them later. Somehow I can't believe that they should stay regardless of their circumstances. And in the end, it's not the congregation who has to live with this arrangement..it's the people involved. I guess whoever is without sin can cast the first stone because that is what a few responses sound like on this thread.

 

Adopted Daughter, I do recall that you said, the only way to "stop sinning" if you are remarried, is to be celibate. But I also recall, that you said remarriage was a sin.
So if the remarriage is the sin, whether or not you are celibate in the second marriage would be void, by this belief. If the sin is remarriage, and divorce is sin, then sex would not even be a factor, unless it would be fornication and not adultry.
Romone16 and I were both asking questions which were not being answered in that thread.
For all of you who are against remarriage, I would like to ask, how would YOU rectify the "sin" of being remarried?
If God made you ultimately responsible for the souls of the "divorced/remarried", and you had to tell them what the bible says to do, what would be your answer?
Just remember, there are new christians and maybe some revived ones too. Are you willing to advise them/us to run out and divorce our spouse, or some other irrevocable action, because we are in the state of "contant sinning"?
Christine

 

Christine,
I'm afraid you won't get a direct answer, because they can't answer it. Better to avoid the question than for them to discover they need to change their thinking.

 

I do have a question that just occurred to me. Does God hold us responsible for sin that we commit, if we don't know they are sin? I'm not saying that we believe there are not, I'm saying, we just didn't know.
Christine

 

If God made you ultimately responsible for the souls of the "divorced/remarried", and you had to tell them what the bible says to do, what would be your answer?

I don't know what I would tell them to do.

Baptists all too often want to pick and choose from the Bible so that what they are doing will be ok from the Bible's standpoint. If God created us to be with more than one person, then what use is there for marriage? If we were supposed to be with more than one person and share our lives with more than person, then why would marriage have been created in the first place?

I look at marriage in this essence. We are supposed to marry one person and spend our lives with that person. THat person is supposed to be the only one we kiss and be intimate with for the rest of our lives. If we weren't supposed to marry one person, then why would marriage have been instituted. If we aren't supposed to be with one person, and only be intimate with one person, then premarital relations wouldn't be a sin would it? These are the questions which have formed my belief. Logic and *gasp* outside sources took a part in it too.

But then again. It doesn't matter what I think or believe, does it? You've already made up your mind, and what you say is correct, and I will always be wrong. I can't say anything to change your mind. It is your choose to believe what you want, and I can't change it.

 

Adopted Daughter,

No one here is disputing the fact that marriage is for two people. If someone tried to marry more than one person, they'd go to jail.

What we are talking about here is that you are stating that anyone who is remarried is in a perpetual state of adultery, and when you have been asked to provide scriptural references, you have failed to do so.

You have also stated that anyone who is remarried would not be accepted into church fellowship by you, once again without providing any scriptural reference to back that up.
Then you go off on a tangent about "no one will let me state my opinion" and "you all won't change your mind anyway, why should I back up what I said?"

You, and others, make these statements, but when asked what to do about it, how to resolve the situation, you cannot come up with even one answer.

If you would like to discuss this further, please feel free to do so.

 

Originally posted by AdoptedDaughter:
>>I look at marriage in this essence. We are
>>supposed to marry one person and spend our
>>lives with that person. THat person is
>>supposed to be the only one we kiss and be
>>intimate with for the rest of our lives.

Once again, nobody has disputed this. How many times are you going to say this, and how many ways are you going to reiterate the point upon which we have all agreed?

>>If we aren't supposed to be with one person,
>>and only be intimate with one person, then
>>premarital relations wouldn't be a sin would it?

Are we now talking about fornication, or are we still discussing adultery?

>>These are the questions which have formed my
>>belief. Logic and *gasp* outside sources took
>>part in it too.

As I previously stated, what "outside sources" do you utilize to formulate doctrine? I had an LDS tell me that I needed to use the Book of Mormon to better understand the Bible. Additionally, I had a JW tell me that the LDS guy was a heretic, and that I needed to consult the Watchtower to better understand the Bible. We have everything we need in the Bible.

>>But then again. It doesn't matter what I think
>>or believe, does it? You've already made up
>>your mind, and what you say is correct, and I
>>will always be wrong. I can't say anything to
>>change your mind. It is your choose to believe
>>what you want, and I can't change it.

Go back to my initial reaction to your statement about remarriage/celibacy. Show me the Scripture that directly supports your claim, and I will change my belief. Until now, you have yet to provide the Scripture that supports this belief as doctrine.

On a personal note, I sincerely hope that your temperature has stayed in the double digits, and that you have had a full recovery.