Can a Divorced Man be a Pastor/ Preacher?

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The context was the Hebrew betrothal.

The context IS NOT Hebrew betrothal. However, assuming it is, the Hebrew betrothal period takes place after marriage. It is not equivalent to the western engagement, which is prior to marriage.

And the Bible nowhere says that anyone divorced for adultery can remarry. Nowhere at all.

The Bible DOES NOT exclude divorced individuals from remarrying. It only says that those who have divorced for unbiblical reasons and remarry are committing adultery.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The context was the Hebrew betrothal.

I can't find the word betrothal(Or the concept)in Matthew 5. Can you prove this, in English?

Lacy

[ September 19, 2003, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: Lacy Evans ]

 

[Taufgesinnter]

http://webbministries.tripod.com/contents.htm

See chapter 6 especially, starting about halfway through.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

To me, the bottom line is, Biblically, a man should be married to only one wife at the time of calling as a pastor. All bigamists need not apply. Divorce history is irrelevant, as is any other criminal or moral history, except as it sheds light on his current moral qualifications.

Because the scriptural injunctions are present tense, not past tense.

What's even more shocking, is, I am perfectly willing to accept a man that is unmarried as a pastor, even though the scriptures do not explicitely state that is ok. I merely assume that the scripture is warning against accepting bigamists as pastors and deacons. There have always been bigamists, and at the time the bible was written, it was perfectly legal.

 

[Pastor Sam]

Johnv

I agree with you and most of the people on here just can't read well. They have been taught a certain way and that is it nothing can change it. I was taught the same when i was young but I always questioned it.

The woman I was formerly married to ran off with another man and divorced me. I didn't want the divorce and I tried to get her to reconcile but she refused.

Now I am maried to a wonderful woman that truly knows the meaning of commitment.

 

[Taufgesinnter]

Originally posted by Paul of Eugene:
To me, the bottom line is, Biblically, a man should be married to only one wife at the time of calling as a pastor. All bigamists need not apply. Divorce history is irrelevant, as is any other criminal or moral history, except as it sheds light on his current moral qualifications.

Because the scriptural injunctions are present tense, not past tense.

What's even more shocking, is, I am perfectly willing to accept a man that is unmarried as a pastor, even though the scriptures do not explicitely state that is ok. I merely assume that the scripture is warning against accepting bigamists as pastors and deacons. There have always been bigamists, and at the time the bible was written, it was perfectly legal.

The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Pastor Sam:
Johnv

I agree with you and most of the people on here just can't read well. They have been taught a certain way and that is it nothing can change it. I was taught the same when i was young but I always questioned it.

The woman I was formerly married to ran off with another man and divorced me. I didn't want the divorce and I tried to get her to reconcile but she refused.

Now I am maried to a wonderful woman that truly knows the meaning of commitment.

And I have no doubt that God is blessing your marriage, and the Jesus Christ is the head of your household. Let others say what they will, but ultimately, it is between you, your spouse, and your Lord.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant.

Nope, the Bible is very specific: adultery and abandonment break the marital covenant. Where there is not marital covenant, there is not marriage. A person whose marriage has ended because of these is not considered married according the God's Word.

However, when divorcing for reasons outside of the Biblical reasons, then I would agree with you. For example, if I left my wife because she didn't make enough money, and married a rich woman, I'd be living in adultery. However, my ex wife, were she to remarry, would not be living in adultery, because she was biblically abandoned.

 

[Taufgesinnter]

Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
The problem is, a man divorced from his wife and remarried does have only one wife, however he's not living with her, but in adultery with another woman. In the present tense. That makes his divorce history relevant.

Nope, the Bible is very specific: adultery and abandonment break the marital covenant. Where there is not marital covenant, there is not marriage. A person whose marriage has ended because of these is not considered married according the God's Word.</font>[/QUOTE]Why do you keep saying that when it's openly untrue? The NT nowhere says--anywhere, ever--in even a single verse, that moicheia breaks the lifetime spiritual bond of marriage. The NT never says that abandonment is grounds for remarriage. It just isn't there.

I wonder how many times somebody can lose their salvation. I'm only wondering because you said when one party in a covenant breaks it, the covenant is ended--the other party's word is no longer good either, because somehow they're released from their promises, even if their vows are for life (and thus irrevocable). I don't seem to recall anywhere that I've heard a marriage vow that said "as long as we both shall keep them" or "until you break your vows."

 

[Johnv]

What is the biblical purpose of divorce if not to end the marital covenant? It makes no biblical sense to divorce someone if the covenant still exists.

Obviously, death breaks the covenant (which the bible doesn't explicitly say, but it is implied). So the arguement that the covenant is eternal (as it is in OSAS salvation) does not relate to this topic.

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Johnv:
What is the biblical purpose of divorce if not to end the marital covenant? It makes no biblical sense to divorce someone if the covenant still exists.

Actually, it does say that in Romans 7:4-6 and 1 Cor. 7:39.

 

[Johnv]

Romans 7:4-6 don't discuss the marital covenant. 1 Cor. 7:39 supports my previous point, which is that the marital covenant is finite, not infinite, like the salvation covenant.

 

[Gunther]

Sorry, Romans 7:2-3.

 

[Johnv]

Oh, that's better. It doesn't discuss divorce and remarriage. It discusses polygamy. It says that someone who marries another while their spouse is alive is committing adultery.

Contrast that to Jesus' words, that says anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another, EXCEPT IN CASES OF ADULTERY, forces a commission of adultery.

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Johnv:
1. It doesn't discuss divorce and remarriage.

2. It discusses polygamy.

3. It says that someone who marries another while their spouse is alive is committing adultery.

4. Contrast that to Jesus' words, that says anyone who divorces a spouse and marries another, EXCEPT IN CASES OF ADULTERY, forces a commission of adultery.

1. It discusses remarriage.

2. No where does it even hint at polygamy.

3. Exactly. It also says that the marriage law is in full effect until death. Amazing how Paul only sees death as the end of the covenant.

4. Can you quote me that passage. Jesus never says that in the case of adultery is it okay to divorce or remarry.

 

[Johnv]

Matthew 5:32 ... anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

 

[Gunther]

Originally posted by Johnv:
Matthew 5:32 ... anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

I noticed you used the NIV. Unfortunately, the NIV completely misses this one and is another example of how the NIV performs interpretation rather than translation.

The word "pornea" means sexual immorality. So, the NIV restricts the meaning to marriage. If Jesus meant that, he would have used the word for adultery. Unfortunately for your position John, he didn't.

Seeing how the context is an interpretation of the O.T. law, there is only one passage he could have been referring to and only one that everyone would have known: Leviticus 18-19 (which addresses the laws on sexual morality).

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Gunther:
I noticed you used the NIV. Unfortunately, the NIV completely misses this one and is another example of how the NIV performs interpretation rather than translation.

NASB - everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery

NLT - a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery

NKJV - whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery

ASV - every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress

Please tell me how the message is different.

The word "pornea" means sexual immorality. So, the NIV restricts the meaning to marriage. If Jesus meant that, he would have used the word for adultery. Unfortunately for your position John, he didn't.

That makes no sense whatsoever. A married person who fornicates is by definition committing adultery. I do not see how using the word "fornication" as opposed to "adultery" changes the fact that Jesus is stating an exception for marital unfaithfulness in cases of divorce.

Seeing how the context is an interpretation of the O.T. law, there is only one passage he could have been referring to and only one that everyone would have known: Leviticus 18-19 (which addresses the laws on sexual morality).

Jesus is referring to the OT law that said anyone who wants to divorce must give his spouse a certificate of divorce. Jesus is saying that anyone who wants to divorce cannot morally do so except where there is marital unfaithfulness.

 

[Gunther]

John, where in the O.T. does it talk about the laws regarding sexual morality? Note that Christ kept giving the correct interpretation of the Law.

The message is different in the NIV because it limits the activity to marriage. "Marital" and "unfaithfulness" do not come from "pornea". That is an interpretation John.

 

[showard93]

I will still say like Gunther and others have said that yes the Bible does say you can divorce because of Adultrey but it gives no reason to remarry except by death. I will also say that people can make the Bible say what they want it to say but Jesus meant One man and one woman for one lifetime.